Win tickets to see the smash hit musical Mamma Mia at the Roanoke Civic Center. Two winners will each receive four tickets!
One of the greatest labor-saving inventions of today is tomorrow.
What are you putting off this weekend?
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
It sure didn’t take long for the liberal media to try to make a connection with the CO movie massacre and conservative Republicans! How typical!
Within hours after the shooting, ABC News suggested that James Holmes, the shooter, may have a connection to the Tea Party.
At Brietbart.com, Joel Pollak got it right when he accused ABC News of “scapegoating.”
“How interesting that [Brian Ross] and ABC News should think to look to the Tea Party website first–and to broadcast politically volatile information without verifying if that ‘Jim Holmes’ is the same as the suspect…”
There will be more scapegoating from the MSM and the Dems in the days to come with blaming the GOP conservatives and the NRA!
That same thing happened following the shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords!
I was going to let this go but since John R. has brought it up.
The blame game comes from the other side too. Here’s what Republican Rep. Louis Gohmer (what a name!) thinks the blame lies (lays??).
During a radio interview on The Heritage Foundation’s “Istook Live!” show, Gohmert was asked why he believes such senseless acts of violence take place. Gohmert responded by talking about the weakening of Christian values in the country.
“You know what really gets me, as a Christian, is to see the ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and then some senseless crazy act of terror like this takes place,” Gohmert said.
“Some of us happen to believe that when our founders talked about guarding our virtue and freedom, that that was important,” he said. “Whether it’s John Adams saying our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people … Ben Franklin, only a virtuous people are capable of freedom, as nations become corrupt and vicious they have more need of masters … We have been at war with the very pillars, the very foundation of this country.”
Ernest Istook, the host of the show and a former Oklahoma congressman, jumped in to clarify that nobody knows the motivation of the alleged Aurora gunman. Gohmert said that may be true, but suggested the shootings were still “a terrorist act” that could have been avoided if the country placed a higher value on God.
So apparently we can blame it on atheism or the secularization of our country. Still, there is this interesting coincidence. You’ll have to follow the link to find out what it is because it really only works with the pictures.
AS IF your beloved Brietbart.com would not have “scapegoated” if it could be established he was an OWS activist or maybe a “registered Democrat”? Who exactly is it you are trying to convince? The right wing has done nothing BUT scapegoat Barack Obama since he took over the sorry mess left after 30 years of bad decisions? Unbelievable hypocrisy is all I see.
Any sane person knows that he did not have to work hard to get the guns and terror weapons he was able to use and there is NO ONE more to blame for that than the NRA. Just exactly like Fast and Furious at the core.
An article about Senator Warner’s efforts to reduce the US national debt. That’s a terrific plan.
Sen. Warner’s plans call for $4T in debt reduction over ten years. That’s $400B per year.
That’s not cutting the debt.
We haven’t had a budget deficit of less than $400B since 2007, and they are not projected to be less than $533B in the future (and rising). And that’s assuming the projections are close, and since the government always underestimates to present a rosier outlook, that’s not a good assumption.
The debt is increasing, according to the article, at $4B per day…so a $400B decrease would get us about to Tax Day…it’s not a reduction in debt.
So if Warner were successful, he might – MIGHT – help reduce the deficit a bit in the outyears, but it will NOT reduce the debt. I am all for reducing the deficit, don’t get me wrong, and anything that does that is a good thing, but let’s not fool ourselves here.
We have simply got to stop spending money.
“Established” is one thing. ABC did not “establish” anything. They were simply reaching (and hoping). Ross and Steffie WANTED it to be true, and that’s all that mattered.
John, more right wing blaming for the cause of the CO theater murders.
Fred Jackson, the American Family Association’s news director, while discussing the Colorado movie theater shooting today said that liberal Christian churches and liberal media helped contribute to violent incidents by supposedly deemphasizing the fear of God and the Bible. During AFA Today, Jackson had on as his guest Jerry Newcombe of Truth in Action Ministries to discuss his column on the AFA’s OneNewsNow blaming the shooting on a waning fear of God and Hell, and blamed the American Civil Liberties Union for destroying the public school system by supposedly forbidding students from reading the Bible. “You wonder why all these terrible things are happening to us when there is no fear of God,” Newcombe said.…..
And from the World Net Daily or as I prefer it, the World Nut Daily. The reason those people were killed in Colorado is because abortion is legal.
…Let me be clear: Am I comparing this incredibly wicked, illegal mass murder at Aurora’s Century Theatre to the incredibly wicked, legal mass murder committed at Planned Parenthoods across the country each day? Absolutely – and you can quote me on it.….
Oops, forgot this one from pastor Rick Warren who gave the invocation at Pres. Obama’s inauguration. You know him? He wrote a book, a best seller, called The Purpose Driven Life. The cause of the shootings?? Teaching evolution.
The mega-church pastor of the Saddleback Church, Rick Warren, took to Twitter on Friday to express his thought about the recent shooting at an Aurora, Colorado movie theater. Warren blamed the shooting on the teaching of evolution in public science classes:
“When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it.”….
Two possible reasons for Colorado shootings: trans fats withdraw brought on by liberals meddling in other peoples lives, or his double chinned colleagues spent all day shirking their responsibilities posting on websites all day.
#3 “Any sane person knows that he did not have to work hard to get the guns and terror weapons he was able to use and there is NO ONE more to blame for that than the NRA. Just exactly like Fast and Furious at the core.”
Seious accusations. Pehaps you would care to substantiate? Facts please.
#3 Also, your “any sane person” proclamation is ……well, let’s just say, interesting compared to your pious indignation of such characterizations on previous threads:
“I cannot decide who was more offensive, Bolling for thinking it is funny to compare the opposition to his ideology as mentally ill or Chuck’s irksome idea that the mentally ill he does not agree are, do not “suffer any consequences”! Wow, what a trove of ugly.”
Comment by Sandi Saunders — July 21, 2012 @ 12:57 pm
#3 Was the NRA in cahoots with the University of Colorado, where Holmes obtained the materials for his explosives?
Ya never know. (I could CAPITALIZE THAT, but think the substance speaks for itself).
Yes, I can see where it would be offensive to call some people sane.
Larry Hamelin does a good job explaining some subtle points of capitalism. I think the whole thing is worth a read but this part is especially good.
…Capitalism, which is in essence the private ownership of the means of production, entails that there is privileged, unequal, access to production technology (the means of production) as well as barriers to entry in the capitalist class. There is a higher real cost, absolute and relative, for workers and their children to enter the capitalist class than for capitalists and their children to remain in the capitalist class. Furthermore, nominal (money) issues become important; capitalists have two substantial short-term monetary advantages. A capitalist will not die if his factory is shut down for a month; a worker will die if her income is absent for a month. Additionally, because there are many fewer capitalists than workers, capitalists have a much easier time colluding, and therefore becoming a cartel of price-setters. Thus when money is involved, the negotiations between capitalists and workers structurally and systematically push money wages down to the cost of labor power, rather than the absolute cost of labor.….
#12 100% complete dodge, Ms. Saunders.
On thursday of this past week, 6 people died as the result of being rear-ended by a yogurt truck. They are just as dead as the 12 in Colorado. They did nothing to bring this on…just like the 12 in Colorado. The AAA (American Automobile Association) is as culpable in this mass loss of life as the NRA is in Colorado. Why, they actually promote travel via the internal combustion engine. The American Dairy Association certainly bears responsiblility…look at the amount of yogurt sold in this country each day. If we ban the sale of AAA memberships and ban the sale of yogurt…..lives will be saved. Perhaps the big oil companies should be held responsible for supplying the ammunition…oops, I mean fuel, necessary to get these vehicles on the road. I have it on good authority that many Republicans, conservatives and Teas Party members owh, and use with regularity….VEHICLES similar to those involved in the killings. Obviously there is a conspiracy here, somewhere.
I also have a SUSPICION, that President Obama will not visit the families of these slain victims. What is our next target? Ciobani, Oikos, Yoplait, Sealtest or Meadow Gold. My son is a dairy herd manager…I’m suddenly seeing him in a different light, although once the milk leaves the barn, he has no control over it’s final, and possibly fatal, use.
Some NRA members eat yogurt, drive vehicles, buy gas, are Republicans or Tea Party members…or have relatives who do/are. Does Obama Motors (Chevrolet) stand unblemished? I fear not…they actively seek unsuspecting souls to purchase these easily, widely available killing devices. No background check is needed, there is no waiting period, and not a single question on the sales agreement deals with the sanity of the buyer. IT’S THE NRA…IT’S THE NRA! If only we could get rid of the NRA, this mass slaughter would come to an end. The 6 victims were willing drivers and passengers….hmmmmm….if no one ever drives to another movie…problem solved!
More than 30,000 people die on the roads in this country each year. Instead of mandating the gas mileage cars must get, give the following order: Starting immediately, every new car and truck sold in this country will have, as part of it’s integral structure, a “roll cage”, and all other vehicles will be retro-fitted with this cage, paid for by the current owner (private, corporate or dealers). If the owner can demonstrate their inablilty to pay for the installation, they will be exempted from this requirement. The cost of an “after market” roll cage starts under $300. This, of course, will never happen until politicians and the government figures out a way to connect an extra tax (penalty) to the process. The government description of the above two sentences will become a 2,800 page document. I am serious about the roll cage in new cars, and they would save many hundreds of lives each year. You can’t unbuckle a roll cage!
Jim Lucas, call it anything you like, I do not enjoy conversing with you and will avoid it as I please. “Thanks” for caring.
Searching Bear, your analogy involving the AAA (American Automobile Association) and the NRA (National Rifle Association) is not going to hold water. Nor are the others. Please show me when the AAA EVER, much less constantly, fights (lobbying and chumming the waters) any safety innovation or regulation on cars, their drivers, or their licensed operators? THEN you can compare the two. The NRA constantly fights, denigrates and dismisses any “prior restraint” on the sacred “gun rights”. Even when it allows insane people to get guns, even when it allows straw purchases, even when it involves mass murders and arming drug cartels or dead police officers and border patrol agents. The AAA does NONE of that.
NO ONE realistically believes we could ever BAN the sale or use of guns, but that we have to just accept idiots and “evil doers” get guns to slaughter innocent people so that the sacred rights to own and use guns is not inconvenienced is is just beyond credible.
Lots of things have and bear responsibility for the circle of life and death, but no organization has more blood on its hands than the NRA and none fights harder to keep it that way. Quite obviously hate and fear sells.
“Some call it the “parade of ants”; others the “river of iron.” The Mexican government has estimated that 2,000 weapons are smuggled daily from the U.S. into Mexico. The ATF is hobbled in its effort to stop this flow. No federal statute outlaws firearms trafficking within the U.S., so agents must build cases using a patchwork of often toothless laws. For six years, due to Beltway politics, the bureau has gone without permanent leadership, neutered in its fight for funding and authority. The National Rifle Association has so successfully opposed a comprehensive electronic database of gun sales that the ATF’s congressional appropriation explicitly prohibits establishing one.
Just 200 miles from Mexico, which prohibits gun sales, the Phoenix area is home to 853 federally licensed firearms dealers. Billboards advertise volume discounts for multiple purchases.
Customers can legally buy as many weapons as they want in Arizona as long as they’re 18 or older and pass a criminal background check. There are no waiting periods and no need for permits, and buyers are allowed to resell the guns. “In Arizona,” says Voth, “someone buying three guns is like someone buying a sandwich.”
#15 & 16 Wow, SB, that’s some pretty lame comeback.
BTW, did you know that mandated improvements in vehicle safety and in certain driving laws have in fact saved tens of thousands of lives in recent decades. Are you aware than any similar effort with guns meets with nothing but resistance from the NRA and gun lovers.?
#17 & 18 “The NRA constantly fights, denigrates and dismisses any “prior restraint” on the sacred “gun rights”. Even when it allows insane people to get guns, even when it allows straw purchases, even when it involves mass murders and arming drug cartels or dead police officers and border patrol agents. The AAA does NONE of that.”
“Lots of things have and bear responsibility for the circle of life and death, but no organization has more blood on its hands than the NRA and none fights harder to keep it that way. Quite obviously hate and fear sells.”
Tell you what, if you want you can call me “Betty”; (“Jim Lucas, call it anything you like, I do not enjoy conversing with you and will avoid it as I please. “Thanks” for caring.) & if you prefer I can call you “Al”, but once again I call on you to sustain your charges.
(I am certain the AAA appreciates your exoneration).
#1 John R, we’re just learning from your posts, where you twist anything and everything around and take many things out of context in your mighty efforts to blame Obama for everything you see as wrong.
One of the biggest allies liberals have in the effort to enact gun control laws are the criminals. They want you to enact as many gun control laws as possible because it makes it easier for them.
Again, instead of blaming an inanimate object, how about we hold people responsible for their actions, an alien concept for some liberals I know.
#19 The NRA has done more to support gun safety, especially among children than any oranization in history. Their gun safety seminars & hands on training of both civilians & police are legion.
Their Eddie the Eagle safety program has reached millions of children, & is lauded & awarded by many accross the gun issue spectrum.
#22, JimW states “One of the biggest allies liberals have in the effort to enact gun control laws are the criminals. They want you to enact as many gun control laws as possible because it makes it easier for them.” Substantiate this. Provide specific data, quotes, and statistics to prove your statement true. Otherwise, it is pure wishful thinking on your part, sir. Nice rhetoric, though.
JimW, FWIW, this liberal has not blamed “an inanimate object” and if you care to read the posts, I clearly hold the criminals “responsible for their actions”, Not “an alien concept” at all. I do however, still speak the truth about the NRA.
Actually JimW, the biggest allies criminals have is the NRA. NO ONE works harder to make law enforcement and gun crimes easier to commit than those who protect the gun culture. I accept that is not their intention, but the detritus from their mission nonetheless.
Certainly the shooter in this tragedy had thought ahead to armed resistance and was ready to meet it.
#24 Justice Department study:
* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that “a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun.”(42)
* 74% of felons polled agreed that “one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime.”(43)
* 57% of felons polled agreed that “criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police.”(44)
Source; U.S. DOJ
24. Right back at you E…..provide me a statistic where a criminal intends to follow ANY gun law, ever. You do not protect the innocent by disarming the innocent.
JimW, I haven’t asserted that “a criminal intends to follow ANY gun law.” You, on the other hand, have specifically asserted “One of the biggest allies liberals have in the effort to enact gun control laws are the criminals. They want you to enact as many gun control laws as possible because it makes it easier for them.” I am challenging you to substantiate your statement.
Common sense substantiates the statement that criminals would welcome more gun control laws.
They don’t want their law-abiding citizen victims to be armed. And gun-control laws aren’t going to stop the criminal (who by definition doesn’t obey laws anyway, gun-related or otherwise).
Can we at least agree this is no “run of the mill” criminal or gun case? If not, then the rest is truly beyond futile.
If indeed, you stop nothing by making it harder to do, there are many things we all need to stop doing. Surely that is not your argument?
#29 – “They want you to enact as many gun control laws as possible because it makes it easier for them.” I am challenging you to substantiate your statement.”
Anyone with a lick of common sense knows that a criminal would rather face someone who he knows is defenseless. Simply look at how many crimes are committed in “gun free” areas…such as the theatre in Aurora.
OtherRick and Michael, that isn’t the issue here. Try to follow: JimW’s assertion is “One of the biggest allies liberals have in the effort to enact gun control laws are the criminals. They want you to enact as many gun control laws as possible because it makes it easier for them.” I am challenging him to substantiate this statement; not to side-step by saying “Anyone with a lick of common sense knows that…” but to provide evidence that criminals are allied with Liberals in the effort to enact gun control laws.
#26 ” NO ONE works harder to make law enforcement and gun crimes easier to commit than those who protect the gun culture. I accept that is not their intention, but the detritus from their mission nonetheless.”
You continue to make such accusations (and now the caps, THAT’S impressive) & I continue to ask for substantiation, (something other than Casey’s blog, incredibly lame).
I see you guys are arguing gun control. I’ve not read the story at the following link but it was marketed to me as a history of gun control. In case anyone is interested.
Granted – criminals probably don’t give a damn about enacting gun control laws. Criminals don’t give a damn about laws, period.
But they would certainly be happy with the outcome of liberal-backed gun control measures on law-abiding citizens (AKA their potential victims).
Once again, common sense. No surprise that’s not substantial enough for a liberal, though.
I guess criminals never heard of undercover, off duty cops or concealed carry permit holders either? You folks defy logic.
Jim Lucas, I linked to the Casey thread to prove this is not about gun control or coddling the perp for me, as accused by JimW.
It is simply undeniable that the NRA is the largest gun culture lobby, gun control fighting force on the earth. They are your substantiation.
Speaking of gun laws…Chicago (BHO’s hometown) has some of the strictest ones in the country. How’s that working for them?
And I wonder how many gun laws were broken by the administration in the Fast & Furious scandal?
#37 “It is simply undeniable that the NRA is the largest gun culture lobby, gun control fighting force on the earth. They are your substantiation.”
Who can argue with logic like that?
“And I wonder how many gun laws were broken by the administration in the Fast & Furious scandal?”
Well, thanks to the NRA, not very many. See my Post #18 and the link.
#37 Ms. Saunders, the FOP is the largest police “culture” (to use your terminology) lobby….does that mean they advocate police brutality?
Does it substantiate such?
Of course not, that would be silly, wouldn’t it?
Does the FOP routinely lobby for legislation that frees the police to be brutal? If not, there is no comparison to the NRA’s continual fight with billions of dollars over decades of legislation fighting every gun control, tracking, registration, straw purchase, loophole closing, unregulated gun show, internet, parking lot sale, volume, usage and crime fighting technique bill that comes before every legislative body. Not to mention their continual efforts to make concealed carry permits easier to get, and actual competence and proficiency assurances irrelevant. No comparison at all.
#42 “If not, there is no comparison to the NRA’s continual fight with billions of dollars over decades of legislation fighting every gun control, tracking, registration, straw purchase, loophole closing, unregulated gun show, internet, parking lot sale, volume, usage and crime fighting technique bill that comes before every legislative body. Not to mention their continual efforts to make concealed carry permits easier to get, and actual competence and proficiency assurances irrelevant. No comparison at all.”
crime fighting technique
competency & efficiency assurances
Once again, Ms. Saunders, your repeating accusations does not make them so. Once again, please cite any substantiation, any documentation, of these claims.
#42 And “…billions of dollars..”, substantiate/document that one please.
#40 To advocate gun-control measures, then blame the NRA for BATFE/DOJ breaking the most paramount of existing measures (sales to known felons, straw purchases, illegal transferring accross international borders), in order to show, “demonstrate”, the need for more measures, is….well let’s just say, inconsistent.
Your #18 does not address this at all.
#38 – Well said, ToR. Chicago gun violence is astronomical, despite having some of the strongest gun laws in the country.
Instead of creating even MORE laws, how about we start enforcing the ones we already have? You know, like actually putting people in jail? For a LONG time maybe, instead of a slap on the wrist?
What “even more laws” have we advocated Michael?
#47 – Every time an incident such as this happens, Sandi, people start screaming about the need for more gun control laws, such as registration, micro-stamping ammunition, etc.
Instead of making it tougher for law-abiding citizens, let’s crack down and get serious about the criminals.
OK, “billions” was a typo, or an exaggeration if that floats your boat (like the cost of Obamacare being 2.9 Trillion someone once insisted), but millions is correct.
“The National Rifle Association goes to great lengths (and spends a huge sum of money) to defend the right to bear arms. It is opposed to virtually every form of gun control, including restrictions on owning assault weapons, background checks for gun owners, and registration of firearms. NRA’s influence is felt not only through campaign contributions, but through millions of dollars in off-the-books spending on issue ads and the like. Following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the NRA supported proposals to arm airline pilots with guns. Between 2001 and 2010, the NRA spent between $1.5 million and $2.7 million on federal-level lobbying efforts. During the 2010 election cycle, the NRA spent more than $7.2 million on independent expenditures at the federal level — messages that advocate for or against political candidates. These messages primarily supported Republican candidates or opposed Democratic candidates.”
Jim Lucas, please cite any substantiation, any documentation, of these claims:
“BATFE/DOJ breaking the most paramount of existing measures (sales to known felons, straw purchases, illegal transferring accross international borders)”
Thank you for being consistent.
If indeed I was here advocating “the need for more measures”, it might be inconsistent. Since I have quite demonstrably not done so in light of this issue, or the Fast and Furious (though I can see some need), it makes that argument specious IMO.
The measures I have advocated in the past were not “gun control measures” aimed at law abiding citizens, but gun tracking (which is essential) and severe punishment for abuse of such measures. I believe that the evidence proves tracking the gun is our best defense and the best protection for law abiding gun owners, in a gun culture world.
IF (and it remains a BIG if to me), the BATFE/DOJ broke any laws, that does not absolve the NRA from their own stance on fighting not to give the BATFE and DOJ every tool they could use in their pursuit of criminals.
If not more gun laws, then what exactly are you advocating? And what is your beef with the NRA, if you’re not in favor of more gun control laws?
Michael, if you read my comments I linked to on Casey’s blog, I am not sure how, short of execution I could advocate for getting any tougher. I do not want to repeat it all here, but I am hardly asking for any gun control measures in light of this massacre.
I am well aware that both sides use tragedies for their campaigns. Those wanting more gun control to prevent massacres and those wanting less so they can arm to the teeth to be in public. Neither helps in this kind of scenario IMO.
#51 – “The measures I have advocated in the past were not “gun control measures” aimed at law abiding citizens, but gun tracking (which is essential) and severe punishment for abuse of such measures.”
By “tracking” do you mean “registering”? If so, why not say so?
A gun stolen from a law-abiding citizen instantly becomes un-trackable.
All registration does is make it easier for the gov’t to know where to look when it decides to confiscate them.
#50 There is no need to substantiate the very essence of what all, including BATFE/DOJ have acknowledged to be the plan to allow such to track to drug cartels in Mexico. It is the acknowledged purpose of the operation. Then it fell apart. There is reasonable arguement as to the ultimate intent, but no one, including BATFE/DOJ denies the allowing (ordering) of such sales & transfer. This is not in question, never has been.
Your inability to substantiate your accusations is obvious. This obfuscation not withstanding.
#51 Filling space with words proves nothing.
“Gun tracking” is exactly what BATFE/DOJ was trying to demonstrate a need for in F&F.
51.”If indeed I was here advocating “the need for more measures”, it might be inconsistent. Since I have quite demonstrably not done so in light of this issue, or the Fast and Furious (though I can see some need), it makes that argument specious IMO.”
If you are not advocating the need for more measures, what, “in light of this issue” (or any other) are we (you) talking about? What are you advocating?
#53 – “Michael, if you read my comments I linked to on Casey’s blog, I am not sure how, short of execution I could advocate for getting any tougher. I do not want to repeat it all here, but I am hardly asking for any gun control measures in light of this massacre.”
I rarely read Casey’s blog, Sandi, so I have no idea what you said on it.
Did I say that you personally were advocating for more laws? No. I meant the public in general.
#54, wow, paranoid much?
Ms. Saunders, IMO to the point of absurdity I will entertain your comparison of your specious, still unsubstantiated accusations about the NRA to my depiction of the F&F operation. It took aprox 20 seconds to find two (amongst thousands) descriptions you might accept, including one depicting the FEDS charging their own operatives. Amongst the thousands, hope Huffington Post & CBS meet with your approval:
A registered gun, stolen from a law-abiding citizen, reported to police instantly becomes a crime to have.
As long as the gun culture paranoia and the NRA obstinacy runs interference, the criminals and their guns will continue untracked, unabated and unaccountable until AFTER their crime, if then.
There is absolutely “need to substantiate the very essence of what all, including BATFE/DOJ have acknowledged to be the plan to allow such to track to drug cartels in Mexico” It is the heart of the accusations against them! “It is the acknowledged purpose of the operation.” Acknowledged by whom? “…no one, including BATFE/DOJ denies the allowing (ordering) of such sales & transfer.” Actually I think that has been denied and disputed. It IS the question, always has been.
Your inability to substantiate your accusations is obvious. This obfuscation not withstanding.
This soap opera digest reads more like novel than an actual Congressional investigation!
“Quite simply, there’s a fundamental misconception at the heart of the Fast and Furious scandal. Nobody disputes that suspected straw purchasers under surveillance by the ATF repeatedly bought guns that eventually fell into criminal hands. Issa and others charge that the ATF intentionally allowed guns to walk as an operational tactic. But five law-enforcement agents directly involved in Fast and Furious tell Fortune that the ATF had no such tactic. They insist they never purposefully allowed guns to be illegally trafficked. Just the opposite: They say they seized weapons whenever they could but were hamstrung by prosecutors and weak laws, which stymied them at every turn.”
No way on earth I feel the whole truth is known or that all testimony was truthful and honest. I will not indict the BATFE or the DOJ on the basis of what the Issa “investigation” offers.
#49 “OK, “billions” was a typo, or an exaggeration if that floats your boat (like the cost of Obamacare being 2.9 Trillion someone once insisted), but millions is correct.”
Ms. Saunders, I totally substantiated that figure, with documentation. As I showed then, it was simply based on a different 10 year time frame, beginning in 2014 instead of 2012.
Don’t attempt to excuse your unsubstantiated accusations by mis-representing my posts.
Are you ever going to take responsiblity for your posts? Or just continue to try & dodge by the sophmoric changing of subject?
Oh I see, 2.9 / 2.6, million / billion. Who can keep up?
Until I sign a fake name or someone else’s to my posts, I am fairly certain I am the one taking responsiblity for my posts. Why, are you blaming someone else?
#62 I am finished here. If you can say that BATFE/DOJ did not let illegally purchased guns go illegally to Mexico in order (ostensibly) to trace them to drug cartels, something BATFE & DOJ both admit happened, there is no point in trying to continue an intelligent discussion.
This is a given. All parties now focus on who knew, when & why.
60 – If it’s stolen from a law-abiding citizen, it’s already a crime to have it (possession of stolen property) – regardless of whether or not the gun is registered, or reported to police.
Please tell me – how is gun registration going to stop that thief from using it? Unless there’s some kind of electronic tracking device on the gun, that registered gun and the criminal who stole it will continue to be untracked until after it has been used in a crime, IF then.
So what exactly does gun registration solve? How does it prevent crime?
How can they know it is stolen if it is not reported? That makes no sense.
I don’t think that gun registration per se will stop anyone from using a gun, thief or BFF, but if they are caught with an unregistered gun, or a gun not registered to them, that gun can be confiscated and a crime has already been committed. We do not have to wait for them to commit some other crime. No, it is not perfect and it will require more check points and effort, but there has to be a better way than just letting carnage happen and having memorials.
I am sorry that a suggestion has to be fool proof and proven to work before it can be considered. But in all of the stuff I read, tracking the gun is vital and that is best achieved with registration. It would make people more responsible than to sell their guns to strangers in parking lots, straw purchasers would KNOW it is coming back on them, and people carrying a gun not registered to them would know that they are already convicted if caught. Like any law, it is only another deterrent.
Chances are, if a firearm is stolen from a law-abiding citizen, that law-abiding citizen will report the theft to the police. That will certainly be the case if either of my guns are ever stolen. No registration law necessary for that.
Unless you know exactly who stole the gun, and where and when they’re planning to use it…you’ll never be able to confiscate the weapon before it’s used. No registration law, check points or other efforts will work. The only thing registration does is identify the rightful owner (and open that person up to harassment, IMO).
“Like any law, it is only another deterrent”? As if someone determined to commit robbery, rape or murder, is going to be deterred simply because the gun he’s using to commit the crime is “registered”??? I don’t think so.
No nothing is a 100% deterrent. Not even the possibility of a victim who shoots back.
#67 “I don’t think that gun registration per se will stop anyone from using a gun, thief or BFF, but if they are caught with an unregistered gun, or a gun not registered to them, that gun can be confiscated and a crime has already been committed. We do not have to wait for them to commit some other crime”
Giving the benifit of doubt, will assume by “using a gun”, you mean in an overt crime.
You state you don’t think it will stop such crime, nevertheless, advocate making it a crime to own an unregistered gun, or “caught” with one not registered to someone else, rather than waiting for them to commit a crime? Interesting set of assumptions.
Registration is the precursor to confiscation.
69 – Not 100%…but if some armed criminal intends to do bodily harm to me or my family, having the capability to “shoot back” increases my chances significantly. Far more than any silly gun registration law will.
Jim Lucas – I seldom get involved in gun issues simply because I am somewhat middle of the road on them and I see that COngress is not going to do anything anyway. however, could you give3 me the reason why we should allow or that anyone should have assault weapons that are capable of shooting 100 rounds per minute? I cannot come up with a good reason, perhaps you as someone closer to the argument can give me the reasons.
Yes that good old standby of paranoia, “Registration is the precursor to confiscation”. Of course the government is out to get you? Who else?
I am not wanting your approval for any idea I have, in fact such agreement seriously would make me question my position. I think that more gun laws alone are useless and I think we cannot continue to ignore the mass killings. I think that registration and gun tracking is a less harmful and restrictive measure that gives law enforcement more tools and some room for interdiction. I am sure that gun advocates and the NRA will fight it like they do virtually every effort but that alone does not make it not worthwhile.
I do not believe I stated I “don’t think it will stop such crime”. On the contrary, I think it would stop a good bit of crime if people know they are tracking guns. If straw purchasers could be found out, if parking lot sales were virtually ended. I think it is our best hope to turn this tide by changing the focus and hopefully changing society.
If done right, if honestly not done as an “infringement” but an enhancement, I think that we could change how society views guns and how criminals get them so easily.
The Other Rick, as long as you know it is nowhere near 100%, since people carrying guns get killed to, I am happy for you to knock yourself out increasing your chances! It is still not the answer for everyone and it is a failure of society and mankind any way you slice it.
Sure Rich, my pleasure. First, unfortunately your very question exemplifies one of the biggest misconceptions reference the gun debate.
The (initial) gun used by Holmes, and all other such weapons commonly called assault weapons or assault rifles, simply are not so. They are semi-automatic weapons which fire one time with each pull of the trigger. In fact, no different than the Glock pistol Holmes went to when his rifle jammed (more on this later). This technology, essentially unchanged, has been around for over 120 years. Indeed a double action revolver will do the same thing.
Just like plastic guns, Saturday night specials, cop-killer bullets etc., assault-weapon/rifle joins the list of misrepresented firearms & ammunition. We can go into each of these terms & how the ant-gun bunch has misrepresented them another (any) time.
The next such term you are likely to see so perjoratively addressed is high capacity magazines. Whether a magazine (you might here them mistakenly referred to as clips) holds 5, 10, 20, 30 or 50 rounds makes little real difference. Replacing a magazine is quick & easy (so is using a moon-clip to reload a revolver). Indeed, (usually) after market high(er) capacity magazines are prone to malfunction. Thank God this happened to Holmes, and Loughner (Giffords).
Richard I assure you, the shotgun & the Glock pistol Holmes took into that theatre were/are just as capable of evil mis-use as the semi-auto rifle, maybe more.
We can talk about what a real assault-weapon/rifle is, how it operates (including rate of fire) & restrictions/requirements to own, any time you wish. They are in all aspects quite different.
#73 History is not paranoia. Registration is the precursor to confiscation regardless of your usual personal insults.
“I do not believe I stated I “don’t think it will stop such crime”. On the contrary, I think it would stop a good bit of crime if people know they are tracking guns.”
Really; “I don’t think that gun registration per se will stop anyone from using a gun, thief or BFF, but if they are caught with an unregistered gun, or a gun not registered to them, that gun can be confiscated and a crime has already been committed.”
75. Jim Lucas- Thank you, Jim. That helps me understand the differences.
#58 – “#54, wow, paranoid much?”
Nope, not paranoid at all, E. I’m simply being a realist.
Based on the current regime’s disregard for the laws of our nation, I simply don’t trust the gov’t.
Richard, you are quite welcome, sir. Don’t claim all inclusive & don’t expect all to agree. Hope you are well.
Thanks, Mike, I needed a good laugh and your post gave me occasion to chuckle. Have a great evening.
#80 – I’m glad you think disregard for the law is funny, E.
Have a good night.
79. Jim – and to you and yours.
Regardless of the common nomenclature mistakes of people who are not gun experts the truth remains that the ability to fire rapidly in a crowded situation is part of the attraction for some gun advocates and mass killers. It is a valid concern for the rest of us when you see such carnage to ask why any gun has such a capacity for injury and death in such a short time because that is obviously the reason they are chosen. A lecture on the supposedly proper verbiage does not change the concern nor does using the wrong terms invalidate it.
#83 If I were you, with the faulty gun, NRA, gun owner, pro-gun characterizations you make, and your continual refusal to substantiate such (after numerous requests) I too (rhetorically speaking) would argue that knowing what one is talking about, and understanding the terms that one uses is irrelevant.
Name is required
A valid email is required (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Comment is required
Your email address will not be published.All fields are required to comment.
Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:38:43 +0000