Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Fury on January 28, 2013, 05:53:46 PM
-
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY LATEST TO HIGHLIGHT FLAWED LOGIC OF CUOMO GUN GRAB
It may not take ‘10 bullets to kill a deer’, but… an unloaded AR-15 protected a household
Brewster, N.Y. – 1/24/2013 – The Department of Homeland Security is the latest to find Governor Cuomo’s anti-Second Amendment agenda is at odds with reality. A report by Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com cites a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP) on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security and member components such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seeking over 7,000 AR-15’s and matching 30 round clips.
The RFP describes these weapons as “personal defense weapons” and states they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” Governor Cuomo in his recently passed “SAFE Act” has banned these very same modern sporting rifles and clips the federal government finds to be “personal defense weapons.”
This federal government rebuke of Cuomo comes just hours after news broke that two students from Rochester lives were evidently saved by an AR-15 as armed intruders entered their home. The very same personal defense weapon Cuomo plans to take out of law abiding gun owners hands protected two of New York’s best and brightest.
Senator Greg Ball (Patterson – R, C, I) Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee said, “Now the Department of Homeland Security even agrees that these modern sporting firearms, made illegal by Governor Cuomo, are suitable for self defense. On top of that, a recent story reports that two RIT students who were legal gun owners were protected by an AR-15. The story may have had a very tragic ending, had Governor Cuomo’s anti-self defense bill been in full effect. If the story is accurate, their legal ownership of this modern sporting rifle evidently saved their lives. While Cuomo says ‘it doesn’t take 10 bullets to kill a deer’, it evidently only took an unloaded AR-15 to protect a household. Luckily these criminals struck before Governor Cuomo’s gun grab was fully unleashed.”
Source:
Original Story: http://radioviceonline.com/department-of-homeland-security-sport-rifle-ar-15-suitable-for-personal-defense/
RFP: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d791b6aa0fd9d3d8833b2efa08300033&tab=core&_cview=0
13WHAM on RIT Students: http://www.13wham.com/news/local/story/Homeowners-Scare-Off-Burglars/7yaLSXAvCUGBkwgAZpGO4g.cspx
http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/department-homeland-security-latest-highlight-flawed-logic-cuomo-gun-grab
As Senator Greg Ball (R-NY) points out, when it is the government in question, then AR-15s are just fine for personal defense, including with matching 30 round clips.
Just not for YOUR personal defense. Unreal.
If they’re painted pink, are they more acceptable looking?
-
Bingo - the cops want to arm theselves w AR's why?
-
newsflash
LE and agencies of the Federal governemnt has a lot of stuff that you're not allowed to have
This is nothing new
-
newsflash
LE and agencies of the Federal governemnt has a lot of stuff that you're not allowed to have
This is nothing new
What are they worried about?
-
What are they worried about?
What are you worried about
-
Bingo - the cops want to arm theselves w AR's why?
Pretty funny. They highlight how they want them because they're quality personal defense but you're not allowed to have quality personal defense for yourself.
Just another example of the stunning hypocrisy displayed by your typical leftist prog.
-
newsflash
LE and agencies of the Federal governemnt has a lot of stuff that you're not allowed to have
This is nothing new
newsflash, the bill Fienstupid is putting forward exempts herself, government officials and retired law enforement. The point being that all of these people want them for "personal protection" and because, "criminals won't follow the rules" lol...
-
newsflash, the bill Fienstupid is putting forward exempts herself, government officials and retired law enforement. The point being that all of these people want them for "personal protection" and because, "criminals won't follow the rules" lol...
Yet we the citizen have to deal w these same criminals every day that the police feel the need to defend themselves w AR's right? But we cant have AR's to defend ourselves against these same criminals right?
What am I missing here?
-
newsflash, the bill Fienstupid is putting forward exempts herself, government officials and retired law enforement. The point being that all of these people want them for "personal protection" and because, "criminals won't follow the rules" lol...
I also lol'd.
I don't understand their logic... We (citizens) don't need them/shouldn't have them to protect ourselves (not even getting into the other legitimate sporting uses for the rifles), but government officials and retired LE need/should be able to have them to defend themselves.
Epic. Lulz.
-
I also lol'd.
I don't understand their logic... We (citizens) don't need them/shouldn't have them to protect ourselves (not even getting into the other legitimate sporting uses for the rifles), but government officials and retired LE need/should be able to have them to defend themselves.
Epic. Lulz.
You're trash and thus expendable. People like Feinstein are special because they're parasites who chose to park their asses in congress for decades on end.
-
You're trash and thus expendable. People like Feinstein are special because they're parasites who chose to park their asses in congress for decades on end.
It's not even Feinstein that bothers me, I'm sure plenty of people would love to assissinate her ass so I can slightly understand that... What bothers me is why retired LE need them to defend themselves, but we shouldnt? Does that even make any sense? Joe-fuckin-blow retired street cop needs an AR to defend himself but your average citizen does not?
-
It's not even Feinstein that bothers me, I'm sure plenty of people would love to assissinate her ass so I can slightly understand that... What bothers me is why retired LE need them to defend themselves, but we shouldnt? Does that even make any sense? Joe-fuckin-blow retired street cop needs an AR to defend himself but your average citizen does not?
Joe Blow is different from a retired cop who barely went to the range never shot a bullett in the line of duty how? ;D ;D ;D
-
It's not even Feinstein that bothers me, I'm sure plenty of people would love to assissinate her ass so I can slightly understand that... What bothers me is why retired LE need them to defend themselves, but we shouldnt? Does that even make any sense? Joe-fuckin-blow retired street cop needs an AR to defend himself but your average citizen does not?
I think including guys like LE and retired LE is done to appease them and keep them on her side. If they're pushing to take your guns away but they give you a pass because you're going to be the one enforcing said law, I'd reckon you'd be more likely to enforce the law as it wouldn't affect you in any way.
-
Joe Blow is different from a retired cop who barely went to the range never shot a bullett in the line of duty how? ;D ;D ;D
Exactly my point, Joe-fucking-blow retired street cop that has no more of a valid reason to need to defend himself any more than any other random citizen should be able to have an AR, but we shouldn't?
-
I think including guys like LE and retired LE is done to appease them and keep them on her side. If they're pushing to take your guns away but they give you a pass because you're going to be the enforcing said law, I'd reckon you'd be more likely to enforce the law as it wouldn't affect you in anyway.
Yeah, I was thinking along those same lines.
-
Exactly my point, Joe-fucking-blow retired street cop that has no more of a valid reason to need to defend himself any more than any other random citizen should be able to have an AR, but we shouldn't?
Its called media brainwashing the sheep
-
Ill give straw the benefit of the doubt and say he thought it was just the DHS and not retired govt officials.
But I do want to hear how straw feels about feinsteins bill giving passes to retired govt employees.
-
the government also has grenades, missiles, and nukes.
fucking hypocrits for not allowing citizens to possess those weapons.
-
the government also has grenades, missiles, and nukes.
fucking hypocrits for not allowing citizens to possess those weapons.
nukes, grenades, and missiles could kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of people.
Assault weapons only kill a few hundred a year.
You're not a very good anarchist... ::)
-
the government also has grenades, missiles, and nukes.
fucking hypocrits for not allowing citizens to possess those weapons.
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=456205.msg6574395#msg6574395
-
Bingo - the cops want to arm theselves w AR's why?
to make us slaves
-
nukes, grenades, and missiles could kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of people.
Assault weapons only kill a few hundred a year.
You're not a very good anarchist... ::)
am i arguing for regulations on nukes grenades or missiles?
no
im just pointing out the hypocrisy of people getting mad at regulations on one type of weapon, and not others.
conservatives are fuck jobs, plain and simple
(as for the ar-15 being less lethal than bombs.. sure. but thats not the argument.)
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/21/us-appeals-court-upholds-maryland-assault-weapons-ban.html
ANNAPOLIS, Md. – Maryland's ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.
In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., said the guns banned under Maryland's law aren't protected by the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.
Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it's "unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment."
"It's a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it's en-banc and for the strength of its decision," Frosh said, noting that all of the court's judges participated.
Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn't even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority "has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms." He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law....
-
I wonder what level of expertise that judge has with weapons, war, and weapons of war.
I don't think he knows what he is talking about and obviously many elements in the government don't agree with him.
AR-15s are an incredibly effective personal defense weapon, especially good in close quarters.
-
Here's what the government wants to do.....
"Lets import millions of hostile, unemployable, military-aged males from middle eastern countries. Dump them in the neighborhoods of our citizens, and simultaneously find ways to restrict those citizens from protecting themselves. What could possibly go wrong? Well, it doesn't matter because we are all millionaires with armed security living in ivory towers where none of this will affect us".
Thank God for Trump.