Just one more firearms thread

rgambs

jmuscatello said:

Godfather. said:

In 1865 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States ..
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States ..
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States ..
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States ..
In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby's cafeteria.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.
In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung - Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis ..
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school.
As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.
One could go on, but you get the point, even if the media does not. Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns. Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, nor Republican conservative was involved in these shootings and murders.
We dont need gun control, we need Democrat control


not that really matters....just say'n LOL!!!


Godfather.

and not a woman on this list, huh. I'd say young males might be a demographic to worry about. I'd like to see the average age of the shooters....and average age that mental illness presents.... and maybe throw in IQ data (higher average IQ often correlated with higher rates of mental illness), which would of course explain all the democrats... higher IQs! Yes!
(Just kidding, mostly...)

incidentally, studies have shown conservatives are less informed (and id bet the farm lower IQ) than all other self identified political affiliations

callen

mickeyrat said:

unsung said:

Cosmo said:

goingtoverona said:

if I had to guess i'd say that a permit to carry concealed allows you to do something with your gun(carry it in public), whereas registering doesn't, it's just hey here's who I am and all the guns I own. but it doesn't give a person more freedom or rights.
I can appreciate both sides of the argument of whether registration should be done, but the whole government coming to take my guns idea is a bit preposterous. it's just not possible, even if they know everything about you, how many guns you have, and where you keep them, it just can't be done. if the government did try to come and take everyone's guns, they wouldn't make it through ten percent of the population before word would get out and peoples guns would miraculously be stolen or lost. not to mention all the violence that would come from the resistors willing to fight. that being said, i'm totally down with registering all my shizzle, so long as it doesn't cost me anything.

...
I agree. The government isn't going to storm people's homes and confiscate legally owned guns... and I don't want the government to do it, even if I don't own a gun because it goes against our Constitution.
The worst analogy used by the gun lobby.... that Hitler took away the guns in order to take control. Like, if the Jews were armed, they would have been able to defend themselves and avoid the Holocaust.
Seriously? Don't people remember who the Nazis were and what it took to finally defeat them? It took the combined Armies of the U.S., Britian, Russia, Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand and insurgents in France armed with tanks and machine guns and bombers and fighter planes to do it. No one will ever convince me that the Jews and gypsies in the the Berlin ghettos, armed with hand guns would ever have been able to hold off and defeat the German Army.

What if laws were passed that made currently legal firearms illegal to own?

Would you support door to door confiscation after that?

There wont be door to door to much manpower and risk of confrontation.
One word.
Drones.

That's freakin funny Mickey

callen

brianlux said:

I noticed on another thread, Kat suggested we not create so many new gun threads. Here's an idea- what if (OP willing) this were renamed "One Last Gun Thread" and carry on the discussion here?

Maybe the same with Global warming. I'm guilty of creating several AGW threads. In fact I'll start one now and suggest we keep it to one.

Agree.

Also be cool if we would stop getting personal. I mean we're all adults and we can zing each other hard with points but keep it WO PERSONAL ATTACKS
I'm willing to bet that we'd all get along really well sharing some adult beverages.

Jason P

When the NRA calls you out as a gun toting weirdo ... well, enough said.

NRA calls 'open carry' rallies 'downright weird'

NRA criticizes Texas 'open carry' rallies, in which advocates bring guns into businesses

HOUSTON (AP) -- Companies, customers and others critical of Texas gun rights advocates who have brought military-style assault rifles into businesses as part of demonstrations supporting "open carry" gun rights now have a surprising ally: the National Rifle Association.

The advocates' actions in restaurants and other public places — part of a push for less restrictive gun laws, including legalizing the open carry of handguns — have prompted public criticism.

The NRA has long been a zealous advocate for gun owners' rights. But the group's lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, has called the demonstrations counterproductive to promoting gun rights, scary and "downright weird."

The NRA said the demonstrations have "crossed the line from enthusiasm to downright foolishness."

"Using guns merely to draw attention to yourself in public not only defies common sense, it shows a lack of consideration and manners. That's not the Texas way. And that's certainly not the NRA way," the NRA said in a statement posted on its website Friday.

The president and vice president of Open Carry Texas, one of the groups behind the recent demonstrations, did not return emails seeking comment late Monday.
.....

news.yahoo.com/nra-calls-open-carry-rallies-142822502.html

brianlux

^^^ I guess I might have to think twice about taking my Thompson submachine gun into Starbucks after all. Oh wait, I don't patronize Starbucks.

goingtoverona

i'm surprised they are against this, I would've thought that, "it's our 2nd amendment right to carry our guns wherever we want to" would be the statement from the NRA.

mattsl1983

incidentally, studies have shown conservatives are less informed (and id bet the farm lower IQ) than all other self identified political affiliations

I would like to have a little more information on these studies.

mattsl1983

goingtoverona said:

i'm surprised they are against this, I would've thought that, "it's our 2nd amendment right to carry our guns wherever we want to" would be the statement from the NRA.

Maybe that's because you have a miss informed opinion of the NRA?

goingtoverona

I don't think so, my opinion of the NRA is that they will bend over backwards to fight against anything anti gun. that's what they do, which is why it's bizarre that they are speaking out against this.

brianlux

goingtoverona said:

I don't think so, my opinion of the NRA is that they will bend over backwards to fight against anything anti gun. that's what they do, which is why it's bizarre that they are speaking out against this.

I think a lot of people are surprised by this. Maybe it's just that they are concerned that the majority of people would get bit nervous if people start carrying weapons into public and work places (duh- I know I would be) and they believe that this response will set the public against their gun agendas. Someone in the NRA must be using a little basic logic. If that keeps up maybe someday they will understand the logic of banning assault weapons and making it more difficult for the average Jane and Joe to acquire firearms of any kind.

unsung

Did they do something illegal?

mattsl1983

I'm confused. The NRA has never set about trying to arm anyone. They fight for the 2nd amendment. It's what they believe in. Just because you advocate for the right to bear arms doesn't mean you think everyone should be walking around waving a gun around. It's not a black and white issue. Also, what are these assault weapons they need to ban?

I would encourage you to take a look at the link below.
http://www.assaultweapon.info

callen

Matt. NRA exists to support weapons manufacturers. Just happens to align with second amendment.

callen

unsung said:

Did they do something illegal?

Laws??? Legal??? No bearing in life.

Now right and wrong different story.

Imagine how fked our society will become when average insecure Amerikan starts walking around with guns strapped to their hips. The arms race that would ensue. Bigger and bigger and with lasers!!! Woo hoo.

unsung

Right and wrong?

Says who?

Arms race? Ah, the great wild west shootout that the anti's claim will always happen but never does.

callen

unsung said:

Right and wrong?

Says who?

Arms race? Ah, the great wild west shootout that the anti's claim will always happen but never does.

Right agree can debate right and wrong but laws have no validity so when you asked were they doing something illegal, not relevant.

My opinion is that if the US suddenly went to all open carry it would suck big time. You disagree? Would you support?

mattsl1983

callen said:

Matt. NRA exists to support weapons manufacturers. Just happens to align with second amendment.

Or the NRA exists to support the 2nd amendment, and gun manufactures align themselves with the NRA. Which is common sense. Any industry will help support an organization that fights for their product.

callen

mattsl1983 said:

callen said:

Matt. NRA exists to support weapons manufacturers. Just happens to align with second amendment.

Or the NRA exists to support the 2nd amendment, and gun manufactures align themselves with the NRA. Which is common sense. Any industry will help support an organization that fights for their product.

Follow the money. The money rules not the cause. My opinion I know.

mattsl1983

Follow the money?

Manufacturers do donate to the NRA, again that would be pretty obvious and not some profound statement. Businesses donate to organizations that will benefit them. But as you stated, you know your opinion.

goingtoverona

@blux, I think you hit the nail on the head, the first part anyways. you know how I feel about assault weapons being banned.