Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on October 02, 2017, 04:11:55 PM



Title: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 02, 2017, 04:11:55 PM
Never let a tragedy stop you from furthering a political agenda. 

Facts Be Damned: Journalists Lobby for Gun Control After Shooting

By Chris Reeves | October 2, 2017

On Monday’s daily White House briefing, journalists went into overdrive, pushing for Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee-Sanders to talk about gun control and what President Trump was planning on doing policy-wise after Sunday's mass shooting in Las Vegas.

As soon as Huckabee-Sanders finished with an emotional statement commenting on the shooting, reporters immediately jumped in with questions about what the President’s thoughts were on gun control:

JEFF MASON [REUTERS]: Sarah, many times when these horrible massacres occur, it leads to questions about gun control. Has this particular massacre made the president think anything more about pursuing tighter gun laws such as background checks to prevent the massacres like this from happening again?

(...)

JEFF ZELENY [CNN]: To follow on that Sarah though, do you believe that, or does the President believe that this is a moment that this is a time when this should not be a political discussion, it should be a policy discussion? Does he believe that he could bring something new to the gun debate that has been, you know, uh, I guess a locked-in typical politics for so many years?

(...)

ZELENY: But before, if I could follow up, before he was elected President, in some fifteen or sixteen years ago, he did have a different view on guns than he had during the campaign. Does he believe that this is something that he could lead a bipartisan effort on at some point? At what point would that be appropriate?
Later during the briefing, two particularly obnoxious questions came from Hallie Jackson of NBC News and Steven Portnoy of CBS News Radio that expressly pushed Democrat Party talking points from Senator Chris Murphy and Hillary Clinton:

See below for a full transcript of the list of questions from today’s briefing:

2:13 PM EST

MAJOR GARRETT [CBS]: Can you tell us a little bit about how the President first learned about it and your engagement with him, his own personal reaction to the events of today? And he also said in the Oval [Office] he might spend more than a day in Las Vegas, was he referring to a couple of days there?

(...)

GARRETT: Have you had a chance to talk to him about his own, how he dealt with this?

(...)

JEFF MASON [REUTERS]: Sarah, many times when these horrible massacres occur, it leads to questions about gun control. Has this particular massacre made the president think anything more about pursuing tighter gun laws such as background checks to prevent the massacres like this from happening again?

(...)

JEFF ZELENY [CNN]: To follow on that Sarah though, do you believe that, or does the President believe that this is a moment that this is a time when this should not be a political discussion, it should be a policy discussion? Does he believe that he could bring something new to the gun debate that has been, you know, uh, I guess a locked-in typical politics for so many years?

(...)

ZELENY: But before, if I could follow up, before he was elected President, in some fifteen or sixteen years ago, he did have a different view on guns than he had during the campaign. Does he believe that this is something that he could lead a bipartisan effort on at some point? At what point would that be appropriate?

(...)

MATTHEW NUSSBAUM [POLITICO]: Thanks, Sarah. On Puerto Rico, can you tell us a little bit about the president's aims for his visit tomorrow? And do you expect any tension given some of his comments over the weekend?     

(...)

NUSSBAUM: From some of his comments over the weekend like the folks down there wanted everything done for them, do you expect that to come up in any of these conversations?

(...)

CECILIA VEGA [ABC]: Let me just pick up on that. Who exactly wants everything done? You said “they?”

(...)

VEGA: And then just back up to today’s tragedy really quickly if I may, does the president believe that what happened amounts to an act of domestic terrorism?

(...)

JOHN ROBERTS [FOX NEWS]: Over the weekend, this was pointed out, the President was very sharply critical of Carmen Yulín Cruz, who’s the mayor of San Juan. Other than her comments on Friday morning, in which she criticized Elaine Duke for saying this was a good news story in terms of DHS getting supplies out to areas that were needed, what was she was doing that prompted such criticism from the President?

(...)

ASHLEY PARKER [THE WASHINGTON POST]: Has Tom Price reimbursed the government yet for his seat on those flights and if not, is there a specific deadline when you and the President expect him to do so by?

(...)

JORDAN FABIAN [THE HILL]: Thank you Sarah. Given what the President said about Secretary of State Tillerson's outreach to North Korea over the weekend, does the President still have confidence in him as Secretary of State? 

HUCKABEE-SANDERS: He does.

FABIAN: Has he spoken to him since those, since he sent out those tweets?

(...)

JON DECKER [FOX NEWS RADIO]: Thanks a lot Sarah. It's a very sad day in this country as you mentioned at the top and as the President said in his remarks. He said that when he goes out to Las Vegas, he's going to meet with first responders and in addition to that families of the victims that were impacted by this. What's the message to each of those groups when he goes out there?

(...)

JESSICA STONE [CGTN]: Sarah, thank you. And following up on the tweets about the [inaudible] over the weekend, the President tweeted: “Save your energy Rex, we'll do what has to be done!” So is it the stated position of the White House that you're trying to get back to talks or have you given up?

(...)

STONE: The Secretary of State talked about those three [inaudible] lines of communication with Pyongyang, that’s what you’re primarily using it for? You’re not using it to try to get, measure what their plans are?

(...)

HALLIE JACKSON [NBC NEWS]: Sarah, can I follow on that? I also wanna ask you about today, but does the President believe diplomacy then is not worth pursuing in North Korea?

(...)

JACKSON: And then asking about today as well, you talked about how now is not the time to get into a gun control debate or to talk about policy. After the Orlando shooting, the President that day was out on Twitter talking about policy. He was talking about his travel ban. So, when, for example, Senator Chris Murphy says it's time for Congress to get off its ass and do something, does the President agree?

(...)

JACKSON: So what should they do in the President’s mind?

(...)

JACKSON: So related to gun control, “What would the President like to see Congress do?” is the question I wanna get out.

(...)

JACKSON: Can you explain how that’s different for Orlando though Sarah, when at that day, he was talking about the travel ban, saying he didn’t want congratulations, essentially? Why is what’s happened...

(...)
               
STEVEN PORTNOY [CBS NEWS RADIO]:Thanks, Sarah. I do want to ask you because before last night's massacre, a bill was advancing through the House, Republicans cleared it through the House Committee on natural resources that would, among other things, make it easier for people to buy silencers. Hillary Clinton tweeted about it this morning, she said that “Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.” Does the White House have a position on this particular piece of legislation?

(...)

LOUISE RADNOFSKY [WSJ]: Sarah, are there any policy prescriptions that the President considers to be out of bounds on the policy debate that will happen in the next few weeks. Could you articulate a little bit what his position on gun control is?

(...)

FRED LUCAS [THE DAILY SIGNAL]: Just wanted to ask about the reso-, bill, the Congress McCain-Lee Act, which would give a permanent exemption to Puerto Rico from the Jones Act. Would the administration consider either a permanent repeal of the Jones Act or at least an exemption from it for Puerto Rico at some point?

(...)

LUCAS: Okay. Also, on the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, there have been some attacks among Senators, some in the media, on her religious beliefs. Does the White House have some concerns about that?

(...)

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/chris-reeves/2017/10/02/facts-be-damned-journalists-lobby-gun-control-after-shooting


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 02, 2017, 04:20:50 PM
Tomi Lahren: Las Vegas Victims Were Americans, Not Democrats or Republicans

In her newest Final Thoughts commentary, Tomi Lahren reacts to the Las Vegas massacre...

Las Vegas, I have no words to describe how heartbroken I am. Las Vegas was my college town, it was my home for four years. My heart breaks for you, for the city, for what you’re going through.

The deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history with the death toll rising by the hour. It’s times like these and tragedies like this that put it all in perspective. Those innocent people at that concert weren’t Democrats or Republicans, they were Americans. It’s sick and sad some can’t see it that way. Like the now former CBS vice president and senior counsel who took to Facebook to say quote: I’m actually not even sympathetic because country music fans often are Republican gun toters."

Listen here Hayley Geftman-Gold, it’s those Republican gun-toters who would risk their lives to protect you in any active shooter situation and it’s very sad you’re too ignorant and hateful to see it that way. You make me sick but you’re not the only one.

Last year’s failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton wasted zero time before she made this tragedy into an anti-gun political talking point. First of all Hillary, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Second, how dare you. You’re going to blame this senseless shooting on the NRA and law-abiding gun owners, really? For what? To advance your own agenda and political aspirations? Do some soul-searching and learn about firearms before you open your mouth.

The notion that a crazed, heartless monster willing and excited to slaughter thousands of innocent concert-goers from the 32nd floor of a hotel would somehow be stopped by more gun control is liberal logic at its most tone deaf.

And need I remind you, when shots rang out it wasn't the kneelers, it wasn't protesters, it wasn't Hollywood liberals who ran into danger to serve and protect, it was our police officers who held the line as they always do. When chaos and violence erupt, police officers and first responders don’t care what color you are, who you voted for, or even how you feel about them. They are the first ones in, the last ones out and sadly, some never return home to their loved ones. Amidst all the speculation, all the motive-seeking, all the politics, one thing is certain, our police officers and first responders are heroes among us and Las Vegas is blessed with some of the finest.

Las Vegas, we are with you. From L.A., God bless and take care.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/10/02/tomi-lahrens-final-thoughts-las-vegas-victims-were-americans-not-democrats-or-republicans


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 02, 2017, 05:55:19 PM
No amount of gun control will stop criminals from getting guns and making the unarmed into victims.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 02, 2017, 06:09:55 PM
right on cue

we can never talk about gun control when a mass shooting has happened

just totally inappropriate

same goes for almost any topic

If there is a bad fire it's not the time to talk about fire codes

If a building falls down during an earthquake that is absolutely not the time to talk about building codes

If someone dies from diabetes that is definitely not the time to talk about the shitting eating habits in this country

This country is full of very sensitive snowflakes (especially on the right) and they need to be a safe space before confronting their mind with these confusing topics

There really is almost no right time.  Maybe one day a month, in the dead of winter at 2am.

That might be the right time


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 02, 2017, 06:14:22 PM
right on cue

we can never talk about gun control when a mass shooting has happened

just totally inappropriate

same goes for almost any topic

If there is a bad fire it's not the time to talk about fire codes

If a building falls down during an earthquake that is absolutely not the time to talk about building codes

If someone dies from diabetes that is definitely not the time to talk about the shitting eating habits in this country

This country is full of very sensitive snowflakes (especially on the right) and they need to be a safe space before confronting their mind with these confusing topics

There really is almost no right time.  Maybe one day a month, in the dead of winter at 2am.

That might be the right time
What's to talk about? Gun deaths are a miniscule amount of deaths per year in the US, there are far more deadly issues to discuss.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 02, 2017, 06:17:34 PM
What's to talk about? Gun deaths are a miniscule amount of deaths per year in the US, there are far more deadly issues to discuss.

I'm for loosening gun laws or getting rid of all restrctions

We have millions of guns floating around this country and we'll never get rid of them

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube on this

Everyone really needs to be armed at all times (not joking)

You never know when someone is going start shooting up a theater, shopping mall or shooting out the window from a high rise



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Yamcha on October 02, 2017, 06:26:02 PM
I'm for loosening gun laws or getting rid of all restrctions

We have millions of guns floating around this country and we'll never get rid of them

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube on this

Everyone really needs to be armed at all times (not joking)

You never know when someone is going start shooting up a theater, shopping mall or shooting out the window from a high rise



Damn straight


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Yamcha on October 02, 2017, 06:26:44 PM
I'm for loosening gun laws or getting rid of all restrctions

We have millions of guns floating around this country and we'll never get rid of them

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube on this

Everyone really needs to be armed at all times (not joking)

You never know when someone is going start shooting up a theater, shopping mall or shooting out the window from a high rise



Damn straight


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 02, 2017, 06:37:56 PM
I'm for loosening gun laws or getting rid of all restrctions

We have millions of guns floating around this country and we'll never get rid of them

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube on this

Everyone really needs to be armed at all times (not joking)

You never know when someone is going start shooting up a theater, shopping mall or shooting out the window from a high rise


Meh.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 02, 2017, 07:53:12 PM
Meh.

you disagree?



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on October 02, 2017, 07:58:50 PM
yes.. there are no mass tragedies in other countries where owning a gun is impossible....


no trucks, no knives, bombs are used to cause mass casualties......


just guns right??


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Moontrane on October 02, 2017, 09:24:06 PM
No amount of gun control will stop criminals from getting guns and making the unarmed into victims.

Yes.

It’s a simple if uncomfortable moral calculus:  Annually there are perhaps a few dozen killed and wounded in so-called mass-attack shootings (in addition to 12-15,000 gun-related homicides); but there are hundreds of thousands – perhaps millions – of annual instances of people using guns for defensive purposes.  Instances in which people merely brandished their weapons to thwart an attack, robbery, or killing – no shots fired.  These instances are not widely reported.

Like speed limits, tax laws, and restraining orders, gun laws are only as good as the citizens who obey them.

If you could wave a magic wand and confiscate all firearms, only law-abiding citizens would lose their weapons, and rape, murder, and assault rates would skyrocket.

“If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them.”


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Soul Crusher on October 03, 2017, 07:06:30 AM
President Trump: ‘We’ll Be Talking About Gun Laws’
breitbart ^ | AWR HAWKINS
Posted on 10/3/2017, 11:02:05 AM by davikkm

President Trump reacted to the Las Vegas attack by saying, “We’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes by.” According to the Washington Times, Trump praised the police response to the attack, saying on Tuesday the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police did an “incredible job.” He added, “How quickly the police department was able to get in was really very much of a miracle. They’ve done an amazing job.”

But after praising the police, Trump made clear a discussion on gun laws is coming:

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/915202597144989697

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 03, 2017, 09:52:56 AM
No amount of gun control will stop criminals from getting guns and making the unarmed into victims.

Truth. 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 03, 2017, 09:54:05 AM
Yes.

It’s a simple if uncomfortable moral calculus:  Annually there are perhaps a few dozen killed and wounded in so-called mass-attack shootings (in addition to 12-15,000 gun-related homicides); but there are hundreds of thousands – perhaps millions – of annual instances of people using guns for defensive purposes.  Instances in which people merely brandished their weapons to thwart an attack, robbery, or killing – no shots fired.  These instances are not widely reported.

Like speed limits, tax laws, and restraining orders, gun laws are only as good as the citizens who obey them.

If you could wave a magic wand and confiscate all firearms, only law-abiding citizens would lose their weapons, and rape, murder, and assault rates would skyrocket.

“If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them.”

Good point.  Would be interesting of someone tracked the actual numbers of lives saved because of gun ownership. 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 03, 2017, 09:55:14 AM
Incensed Sean Hannity Says Talking Gun Control After Las Vegas Is ‘Shameful’
The Fox News host said it was “despicable” to “politicize” the mass shooting with talks of gun control.
By Rebecca Shapiro
10/03/2017

Sean Hannity responded to the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history by lambasting Democrats and members of the media who are calling for tougher gun control laws.

The Fox News host accused gun control advocates of “politicizing the tragedy in an absolutely despicable display.” He said such discussions in the wake of the mass shooting, which left nearly 60 people dead and 500 injured at a country music festival in Las Vegas, were “so shameful,” “exploitative” and “pathetic.”

“Bodies weren’t even in the morgue yet,” Hannity said. “Parents were in hospitals with their kids who are hanging on to life. None of this mattered to the left in this country.”

The shooter, identified by police as 64-year-old Stephen Paddock of Mesquite, Nevada, opened fire on 22,000 festival attendees from a 32nd-floor hotel room around 10 p.m. on Sunday night. The attack occurred during the final set of the three-day country music Route 91 Harvest Festival.

Initial reports indicate Paddock had more than 20 guns in his room at the Mandalay Bay Hotel, including AR-15-style and AK-47-style rifles. A law enforcement official quoted by the New York Times said two rifles with scopes on tripods were found positioned in front of the broken windows in Paddock’s room.

Like in many states in the U.S., Nevada’s lax gun laws allow residents to openly carry long guns, and no permit is required for such a display. It’s also legal to own a fully automatic firearm in the state.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sean-hannity-las-vegas-shooting-gun-control-shameful_us_59d2fd64e4b065578154f214?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 03, 2017, 11:02:03 AM
you disagree?


A little, yes.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 04, 2017, 09:40:32 AM
By Leah Libresco October 3 at 3:02 PM

Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”

Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.

Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.



After a shooting in Las Vegas left at least 58 people dead and injured hundreds, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Oct. 2 said Congress’s failure to pass gun-control legislation amounts to an “unintentional endorsement” of mass shootings. (U.S. Senate)
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.


When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.

As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.

As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?

However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.

By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.

Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.

 Play Video 1:54
Was the Las Vegas shooting the worst in U.S. history? It depends.
While the attack on the Las Vegas strip is the deadliest in modern American history, attacks in the 19th and 20th centuries had higher death tolls. Here are two deadly events in American history that you may not have heard about. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)
Older men, who make up the largest share of gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.


Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.22553478328e


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on October 04, 2017, 09:57:35 AM
The US doesn't have a gun problem... it has a black and mexican problem...


Goverment Supplied STATS:

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/the-one-gun-violence-statistic-that-no-one-wants-to-talk-about/


(https://s1.postimg.org/3ln30asqkv/chart.jpg)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 04, 2017, 09:13:49 PM
I own a few guns, always have probably always will. But I don't agree with the position "There's nothing we can do, so lets do nothing"
I agree automatic weapons, machine guns shouldn't be available to the average joe. But allowing dealers to sell add ons that make a semi auto an auto to me is just plain stupid.
I don't think there is a very good reason for owning AK 47's and similar rifles, nor do I like hi capacity magazines being available. Sure, its cool to drink a beer and blow through  a couple hundred rounds in a minute with your buddies every once in awhile, but the potential for them to be used against humans is not worth it.
I don't know that banning them now would matter, as the horse has left the barn. But certainly there should be dialogue about not making work arounds to the machine gun ban readily available.    


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 04, 2017, 09:20:01 PM
Incensed Sean Hannity Says Talking Gun Control After Las Vegas Is ‘Shameful’

Hannity makes a fair point

whenever there is a terrorist attack that it's shameful at that time to talk about preventing another attack

same goes for plane crashes...not the time to talk about plane safety

it's just shameful at that time

at some other unspecified time in the future it might be ok

no promises


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 04, 2017, 09:22:26 PM
Hannity makes a fair point

whenever there is a terrorist attack that it's shameful at that time to talk about preventing another attack

same goes for plane crashes...not the time to talk about plane safety

it's just shameful at that time

at some other unspecified time in the future it might be ok

no promises

Within minutes of anything involving a Muslim, Trump is on tweeter calling for stricter bans... hmmm I wonder if Hannity called him out?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 04, 2017, 09:26:23 PM
Within minutes of anything involving a Muslim, Trump is on tweeter calling for stricter bans... hmmm I wonder if Hannity called him out?

pointing out that fact is just shameful

now is not the time


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 04, 2017, 09:29:02 PM
pointing out that fact is just shameful

now is not the time

My bad


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Yamcha on October 05, 2017, 04:16:23 AM
(https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1428/11/1428118492925.gif)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Coach is Back! on October 05, 2017, 06:57:58 AM
No amount of gun control will stop criminals from getting guns and making the unarmed into victims.

liberal politicians already know this but since the ultimate goal is gun confiscation, they know their followers (such as the ones on here) are stupid and will believe anything they're told.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSUXXzN26zg


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 05, 2017, 10:38:45 AM
For me, it's not a question of if add ons that convert semi autos to autos that circumvents the law should be banned, its why they haven't been banned already. That makes no sense


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 05, 2017, 12:21:34 PM
Within minutes of anything involving a Muslim, Trump is on tweeter calling for stricter bans... hmmm I wonder if Hannity called him out?

Examples?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 05, 2017, 05:31:08 PM
Damn straight

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=637353.0;attach=746040;image

That is just delightful.  I give it my full endorsement.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 05, 2017, 05:35:25 PM
Examples?

https://www.inquisitr.com/4499361/london-terror-attack-donald-trump-wants-to-ban-the-internet-to-stop-terrorism/


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 05, 2017, 05:36:08 PM
Examples?

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/336246-trump-tweets-renewed-push-for-travel-ban-after-london-bridge-incident


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Nick Danger on October 06, 2017, 08:46:52 AM
Examples?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/13/us/politics/trump-clinton-sanders-shooting-reaction.html

Donald Trump Seizes On Orlando Shooting And Repeats Call For Temporary Ban On Muslim Migration.

http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/story/donald-trump-seizes-orlando-shooting-and-repeats-call-temporary-ban-muslim-migration


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 06, 2017, 08:58:00 AM
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/336246-trump-tweets-renewed-push-for-travel-ban-after-london-bridge-incident

https://www.inquisitr.com/4499361/london-terror-attack-donald-trump-wants-to-ban-the-internet-to-stop-terrorism/


https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/13/us/politics/trump-clinton-sanders-shooting-reaction.html

Donald Trump Seizes On Orlando Shooting And Repeats Call For Temporary Ban On Muslim Migration.

http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/story/donald-trump-seizes-orlando-shooting-and-repeats-call-temporary-ban-muslim-migration

LOL

weird that a well informed guy like Bum would have no knowledge or memory of this



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 06, 2017, 09:31:57 AM
https://www.inquisitr.com/4499361/london-terror-attack-donald-trump-wants-to-ban-the-internet-to-stop-terrorism/

You disagree with his comments:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Loser terrorists must be dealt with in a much tougher manner.The internet is their main recruitment tool which we must cut off & use better!
12:48 AM - Sep 15, 2017
 27,035 27,035 Replies   21,440 21,440 Retweets   98,139 98,139 likes


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 06, 2017, 09:33:24 AM
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/336246-trump-tweets-renewed-push-for-travel-ban-after-london-bridge-incident

You disagree with this?

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!
1:17 PM - Jun 3, 2017
 55,068 55,068 Replies   53,299 53,299 Retweets   177,374 177,374 likes


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 06, 2017, 09:34:26 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/13/us/politics/trump-clinton-sanders-shooting-reaction.html

Donald Trump Seizes On Orlando Shooting And Repeats Call For Temporary Ban On Muslim Migration.

http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/story/donald-trump-seizes-orlando-shooting-and-repeats-call-temporary-ban-muslim-migration

Links from June 2016.  And you're posting these why? 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Straw Man on October 06, 2017, 09:36:48 AM
Links from June 2016.  And you're posting these why? 

LOL - classic Bum

Now he pretends not to understand the argument



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Coach is Back! on October 06, 2017, 10:03:25 AM
😂😂😂😂

https://www.facebook.com/mbest11x/videos/1143139289163070/


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Nick Danger on October 06, 2017, 10:48:24 AM
Links from June 2016.  And you're posting these why? 

Coach is that you?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on October 06, 2017, 10:51:08 AM
Coach is that you?

 ::)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 06, 2017, 05:21:07 PM
Bad news, any guns I may have own were recently lost in a boating accident.  :'(


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 06, 2017, 07:04:51 PM
Bad news, any guns I may have own were recently lost in a boating accident.  :'(

Some people might say that if you think it's time to hide them......it's time to use them.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 06, 2017, 07:58:14 PM
(https://i.redditmedia.com/St6nPG6sUI77LNGYY7ty0dw3z9IZf01E5NQ5PJC74L4.jpg?w=500&s=29d504263188bcf4e66682ffa24b59c5)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on October 06, 2017, 08:29:42 PM
What a pussy.

Phoenix man turns in his guns in wake of Vegas massacre

(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/StupidisasStupidDoes-600x400.jpg)

http://www.azfamily.com/story/36524940/phoenix-man-turns-in-his-guns-in-wake-of-vegas-massacre

This was his "machine gun" (according to him):

(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Image-139-600x360.jpg)

The best part is that he ended up having to hire armed security for his protection...

https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.pring.9/posts/10159432815150720



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 06, 2017, 08:40:28 PM
Holy shit, what a phaggot.  he he he.  Babe Ruth over here thinks he'll be able to stop a home invasion with a baseball bat.  Good luck with that.

Eat shit you virtue signaling pansy.  You belong in the UK.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Princess L on October 07, 2017, 10:24:19 PM
Great opening, good show

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF5tCHwBoPs



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Montague on October 08, 2017, 03:05:19 AM
What a pussy.

Phoenix man turns in his guns in wake of Vegas massacre

(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/StupidisasStupidDoes-600x400.jpg)

http://www.azfamily.com/story/36524940/phoenix-man-turns-in-his-guns-in-wake-of-vegas-massacre

This was his "machine gun" (according to him):

(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Image-139-600x360.jpg)

The best part is that he ended up having to hire armed security for his protection...

https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.pring.9/posts/10159432815150720


I feel safer already.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 08, 2017, 02:37:08 PM
(http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s320x320/sh0.08/e35/12080674_480705512107745_1582087371_n.jpg)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 08, 2017, 02:44:02 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DLe5TPbUIAA_0BD.jpg)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Core on October 08, 2017, 05:44:41 PM
Never give them up, they are the only real power you hold. The ability to take life at the press of a trigger, to put an end to any issue in your sight picture. That is the gun and it's importance to the USA. Countries that gave them up are long lost, to the degree that they do not even know there is something wrong with their society and govt. Unsurprisingly those same countries are the ones gleefully commenting on the state of American politics with their false sense of superiority, when it is in fact the USA that enables their supposed freedom in the first place and protects them via the threat of our massive military.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 08, 2017, 08:01:10 PM
Never give them up, they are the only real power you hold. The ability to take life at the press of a trigger, to put an end to any issue in your sight picture. That is the gun and it's importance to the USA. Countries that gave them up are long lost, to the degree that they do not even know there is something wrong with their society and govt. Unsurprisingly those same countries are the ones gleefully commenting on the state of American politics with their false sense of superiority, when it is in fact the USA that enables their supposed freedom in the first place and protects them via the threat of our massive military.

Troll


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 09, 2017, 11:42:19 AM
(https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22281732_2014971045389819_7738187412707398564_n.jpg?oh=a5b77ef789d02d85ac388853029571d1&oe=5A74CDB9)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Soul Crusher on October 09, 2017, 12:40:16 PM
(https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22281732_2014971045389819_7738187412707398564_n.jpg?oh=a5b77ef789d02d85ac388853029571d1&oe=5A74CDB9)

or be lectured about gun control by the same idiots who thought Obamacare would work.   Bunch of abject morons all of them. 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 09, 2017, 12:52:22 PM
or be lectured about gun control by the same idiots who thought Obamacare would work.   Bunch of abject morons all of them. 

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, if you like you plan you can keep your plan"   Derp!


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Kazan on October 10, 2017, 07:26:48 AM
This is not about gun control, it never has been. It's about controlling the population. Now why would the framers make it possible for the government to take away your right to bear arms when the main reasons for the 2nd amendment is the for the people to overthrow a tyrannical government?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 10, 2017, 01:48:53 PM
This is not about gun control, it never has been. It's about controlling the population. Now why would the framers make it possible for the government to take away your right to bear arms when the main reasons for the 2nd amendment is the for the people to overthrow a tyrannical government?

According to Democrats the 2nd amendment is about hunting.  They are either retards or liars.   Probably both.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 10, 2017, 04:43:04 PM
This is not about gun control, it never has been. It's about controlling the population. Now why would the framers make it possible for the government to take away your right to bear arms when the main reasons for the 2nd amendment is the for the people to overthrow a tyrannical government?


I'll let you in on a little secret. Promise not to tell... It is about reducing the access to long rifles that are designed mainly to kill humans, like the AR-15 and AK-47 and high capacity round magazines. It's also about making it harder for psycho's to obtain them. But you didn't hear this from me...


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Las Vegas on October 10, 2017, 04:44:49 PM

I'll let you in on a little secret. Promise not to tell... It is about reducing the access to long rifles that are designed mainly to kill humans, like the AR-15 and AK-47 and high capacity round magazines. It's also about making it harder for psycho's to obtain them. But you didn't hear this from me...

Perhaps if they weren't such psychos themselves, we'd have something there.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Kazan on October 10, 2017, 05:19:43 PM

I'll let you in on a little secret. Promise not to tell... It is about reducing the access to long rifles that are designed mainly to kill humans, like the AR-15 and AK-47 and high capacity round magazines. It's also about making it harder for psycho's to obtain them. But you didn't hear this from me...

Guess what? .Gov doesn't get to make that determination, what good is it for the population to be restricted, when a standing military run by said government isn't restricted? Strange but if you actually read the constitution I believe the 2nd is the only one that specifically states "shall not be infringed". Where is the outrage over pressure cookers, or fertilizer?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Las Vegas on October 10, 2017, 06:04:56 PM
And of course it's the potential of the gun which gives it the power to actually stop violence before it happens.  That's what it's all about.  But we can't use that info since nothing very exciting happens compared to blood and guts, meaning it's quickly forgotten or unknown by everyone but the guy who may have saved himself.

Who the hell am I to tell the guy he shouldn't have a gun?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Soul Crusher on October 11, 2017, 04:37:20 AM
"No amount of statistics or facts will sway either side in the gun control debate, because they are all looking for simple solutions to complex problems. The facts of those complex problems are uncomfortable and nobody really wants to come to grips with them.

"For example, we don’t really have a single America with a moderately high rate of gun deaths. Instead, we have two Americas, one of which has very high rates of gun ownership but very low murder rates, very comparable to the rest of the First World democracies such as those in western & northern Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Japan, South Korea. The other America has much lower rates of gun ownership but much, much higher murder rates, akin to violent third world countries.

"The tough questions are those like, why do we have these two Americas? But that’s an uncomfortable discussion to have. So instead those on the left favor simple minded restrictions that target first world America, with its high gun ownership but very low murder rate, but don’t address the root causes of third world America’s violence at all. Meanwhile those on the right correctly feel their civil rights are constantly threatened, so they are constantly in a state of “better stock up before they finally ban it” and the guns and ammo fly off the shelves. The left’s constant gun control rhetoric is the greatest thing ever for arms manufacturers.

"Meanwhile, over the past 40 years, while the number of guns in private hands has doubled, the murder rate has dropped by half. The left are constantly prattling about “assault weapons” which are almost never used to commit murders (about 1% of gun murders; all rifles combined are around 3%). More murders are committed with baseball bats than “assault rifles”; the vast majority of gun homicides are committed with handguns, but it’s easier to sell restrictions that target “assault weapons”, even though such restrictions, even if 100% effective, would make no detectable change in the murder rate (especially because of substitution effects). They favor ridiculous measures such as bans on “high capacity magazines”, as if magazines weren’t cheap and easily swapped out in a fraction of a second.

"The uncomfortable fact is that roughly 80% of the US homicide rate is associated with the drug trade, and the drug trade is violent because the drug war reserves it for violent criminals. We have a system in place where the government subsidizes poverty in urban areas, imposes economic blight in those same areas through heavy taxes and regulations, renders the residents permanently unemployable via the “criminal justice” (sic) system, and creates a lucrative black market in drugs by restricting supply (not to mention increasing demand as people are desperate to escape their circumstances by getting high), meaning the only game in town is often entering the drug trade. The drug trade is violent because those in it have no access to courts to settle disputes. Powerful industries lobby to keep the drug war going; the top spenders are law enforcement unions, the prison industry, big alcohol, tobacco, and pharma.

"Guns are not the proximate cause of gun violence in the US. Childlike magical thinking and simple “fixes” to complex problems will not work. But it is comfortable, and self-righteousness feels so good. So I expect it to continue indefinitely."

 http://bretigne.typepad.com/on_the_banks/2017/10/michael-owen-nails-the-gun-debate.html


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Las Vegas on October 11, 2017, 11:46:04 AM
Wish he'd chosen less divisive words than the worn-out "left" and "right" bullshit, but damn what a great article.

AND

Quote
Meanwhile, over the past 40 years, while the number of guns in private hands has doubled, the murder rate has dropped by half.

Had a gun grab occured 40 years ago, say, through some momentary lapse of reason... who'd say that halved rate would be paraded around today as "evidence" of something it really isn't?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on October 11, 2017, 02:38:28 PM

I'll let you in on a little secret. Promise not to tell... It is about reducing the access to long rifles that are designed mainly to kill humans, like the AR-15 and AK-47 and high capacity round magazines. It's also about making it harder for psycho's to obtain them. But you didn't hear this from me...
Liar.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 11, 2017, 06:55:32 PM
Liar.

swear to god


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on October 13, 2017, 09:50:50 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ8i6EGH4FI


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 14, 2017, 03:58:31 AM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22406146_1498687006880294_4651078425164099211_n.jpg?oh=7522ca62581e99c0282e37d048f0b5b4&oe=5A77BC92)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: calfzilla on October 14, 2017, 04:42:45 AM
We should ban guns. That way the psychos will have to go the European route and bomb us and mow us down with large trucks.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 14, 2017, 05:05:44 AM
We should ban guns. That way the psychos will have to go the European route and bomb us and mow is down with large trucks.

(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22308648_1505747942807411_65222572556927970_n.jpg?oh=58559176f9e2587e0691814f52b9a646&oe=5A79FF7D)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on October 18, 2017, 01:00:54 PM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22308648_1505747942807411_65222572556927970_n.jpg?oh=58559176f9e2587e0691814f52b9a646&oe=5A79FF7D)

He said it was really, really hard, not impossible... :)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Kazan on October 18, 2017, 04:37:21 PM
Why is it really, really hard? Seems to be all the rage in Europe now. And why would a care what some limey twat has to say?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on October 19, 2017, 03:26:41 AM
Must not be that hard.  Dude killed 87 with a truck.  Las Vegas douchebag only got 58.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on May 31, 2018, 10:19:35 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIwf3d7hP9g


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on July 05, 2018, 02:53:53 PM
"Ban guns!"

"You don't need a gun!"


"Protect kids, not guns!"

Well, in this case a woman was able to protect her kids because she had a gun and used it. Good for her.


Texas mom shoots man trying to take car with her kids inside at gas station: 'I hope that woke him up'

A Texas mother said she didn’t think twice about shooting a would-be carjacker when the man jumped into her vehicle at a Dallas gas station while her two sons were in the backseat.

Michelle Booker-Hicks was at the Shell station along Interstate 35 around 10 p.m. Wednesday when Ricky Wright, 36, attempted to steal her vehicle while she was paying her gas bill, police said. Booker-Hicks told FOX4 Dallas her two sons, ages 2 and 4, were sitting in the backseat at the time.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/05/texas-mom-shoots-man-trying-to-take-car-with-her-kids-inside-at-gas-station-hope-that-woke-him-up.html


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Desolate on July 05, 2018, 05:58:08 PM
I would love to see some lib come onto my private property and get my guns.

ROTFLMAO! ::)

I dream about that scenario a couple of times a week.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on July 24, 2018, 12:31:00 PM
Liberal 9th circuit backs right to carry firearms in public, in latest pro-2nd Amendment ruling

The liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals endorsed the right of individuals to carry firearms in public in a ruling Tuesday, striking down a lower court argument that the Constitution only protects that right at home.

“Analyzing the text of the Second Amendment and reviewing the relevant history, including founding-era treatises and nineteenth century case law, the panel stated that it was unpersuaded by the county’s and the state’s argument that the Second Amendment only has force within the home,” the ruling states.

The case resulted from Hawaii resident George Young being denied twice in 2011 as he sought to carry a handgun. Two of the three judges ruled against a lower court upholding the restriction.

It’s the second time this month that the three-judge panel issued a pro-Second Amendment decision, after backing a lower court’s decision last week to suspend California’s ban on the possession of large magazines.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/24/liberal-9th-circuit-backs-right-to-carry-firearms-in-public-in-latest-pro-2nd-amendment-ruling.html


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on July 24, 2018, 12:44:21 PM
Liberal 9th circuit backs right to carry firearms in public, in latest pro-2nd Amendment ruling

The liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals endorsed the right of individuals to carry firearms in public in a ruling Tuesday, striking down a lower court argument that the Constitution only protects that right at home.

“Analyzing the text of the Second Amendment and reviewing the relevant history, including founding-era treatises and nineteenth century case law, the panel stated that it was unpersuaded by the county’s and the state’s argument that the Second Amendment only has force within the home,” the ruling states.

The case resulted from Hawaii resident George Young being denied twice in 2011 as he sought to carry a handgun. Two of the three judges ruled against a lower court upholding the restriction.

It’s the second time this month that the three-judge panel issued a pro-Second Amendment decision, after backing a lower court’s decision last week to suspend California’s ban on the possession of large magazines.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/24/liberal-9th-circuit-backs-right-to-carry-firearms-in-public-in-latest-pro-2nd-amendment-ruling.html

 :o


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on August 03, 2018, 04:26:46 PM
Blueprints have been online for years. This is just political bullshit. Codeisfreespeech.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on August 03, 2018, 04:29:04 PM
on whose behalf?
Anti gunners.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on August 03, 2018, 04:41:21 PM
I don't, but maybe you do, understand how a confusing text from MrTrump can be seen as anti gunners political bullshit
You only quoted the one part of my post which was a general reply to the political reaction to shitty, plastic printed guns that have been online for years, not a direct reply to whatever Trump tweeted.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on August 06, 2018, 10:29:42 AM
(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Armedsecurity-757x513.jpg)

(http://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Hoggsecurity.jpg)



Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on August 06, 2018, 04:36:47 PM
Typical liberal hypocrite.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Soul Crusher on August 06, 2018, 04:38:13 PM
Not surprising.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on August 14, 2018, 02:48:33 PM
This woman is a former sheriff and Texas’ Democratic nominee for governor...

Gun Issued To Former Dallas County Sheriff Running For Governor Missing

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2018/08/13/pistol-former-dallas-county-sheriff-gubernatorial-candidate-missing/

Meanwhile, this is what she says about Gun Control:

I have carried a gun for most of my life - first in the military and then in law enforcement - and I strongly believe in the Second Amendment. But if someone cannot handle their disagreements with means other than violence, they should not be allowed to have a weapon. It’s just common sense - so why not put some common sense measures in place in our state?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on August 15, 2018, 04:03:40 AM
I'm looking forward to when this twat is an adult and we are allowed to question him and hold him accountable for his words and actions.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on August 15, 2018, 05:25:23 AM
Cold dead hands!!!!!


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on August 15, 2018, 05:52:19 AM
This woman is a former sheriff and Texas’ Democratic nominee for governor...

Gun Issued To Former Dallas County Sheriff Running For Governor Missing

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2018/08/13/pistol-former-dallas-county-sheriff-gubernatorial-candidate-missing/

Meanwhile, this is what she says about Gun Control:

I have carried a gun for most of my life - first in the military and then in law enforcement - and I strongly believe in the Second Amendment. But if someone cannot handle their disagreements with means other than violence, they should not be allowed to have a weapon. It’s just common sense - so why not put some common sense measures in place in our state?

They voted this lesbian named Lupe Valdez to be their sheriff, lol.

(https://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2016/07/29/4014349b-b3a2-42e2-8781-870456686052/thumbnail/1200x630/a3e19289ed2f379fc29f5574ddb8cf34/cbsn0728lupevaldez1099620640x360.jpg)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on August 20, 2018, 07:31:14 PM
They voted this lesbian named Lupe Valdez to be their sheriff, lol.

(https://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2016/07/29/4014349b-b3a2-42e2-8781-870456686052/thumbnail/1200x630/a3e19289ed2f379fc29f5574ddb8cf34/cbsn0728lupevaldez1099620640x360.jpg)

what part of her quote do you find appalling?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Coach is Back! on August 20, 2018, 07:43:15 PM
what part of her quote do you find appalling?

How’s this for common sense. Someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night, standing over my kid, I catch him (or her) and I rightfully blow them away no questions asked. I disagreed that they broke into my house. This women is a dolt.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Agnostic007 on August 20, 2018, 08:00:52 PM
How’s this for common sense. Someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night, standing over my kid, I catch him (or her) and I rightfully blow them away no questions asked. I disagreed that they broke into my house. This women is a dolt.

"I have carried a gun for most of my life - first in the military and then in law enforcement - and I strongly believe in the Second Amendment. But if someone cannot handle their disagreements with means other than violence, they should not be allowed to have a weapon. It’s just common sense - so why not put some common sense measures in place in our state?"

And in your wisdom, you think she was talking about shooting an intruder and not the parking lot Clearwater Florida situation or a beef over being cut off in traffic? Really??


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on August 20, 2018, 09:48:49 PM
what part of her quote do you find appalling?

Yeah, I'm sure she's a great cop and a briliant political mind. 

She looks borderline retarded.  Fat, weak and stupid........as evidenced but her losing her fucking firearm.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on September 12, 2018, 03:26:15 PM
Judge strikes down 'highly paternalistic' California law banning handgun ads, slams state's 'distrust' of gun buyers

A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama on Tuesday struck down a 95-year-old California law that had banned handgun ads at gun shops, calling it "unconstitutional on its face" and slamming the state for its "paternalistic" assumption that its residents can't make up their own minds about firearms.

Officials in California had claimed the advertisements would trigger people with “impulsive personality traits” to buy more handguns, leading to increased suicides and crime -- assertions that U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley in Sacramento all but mocked in his ruling.

"The Government may not restrict speech that persuades adults, who are neither criminals nor suffer from mental illness, from purchasing a legal and constitutionally protected product, merely because it distrusts their personality trait and the decisions that personality trait may lead them to make later down the road," Nunley said in the decision, which was made public Tuesday.

"Moreover, in the effort to restrict impulsive individuals from purchasing handguns, the Government has restricted speech to all adults, irrespective of whether they have this personality trait," Nunley added, saying the law was overinclusive.

The 1923 law provided that "No handgun or imitation handgun, or placard advertising the sale or other transfer thereof, shall be displayed in any part of [a gun store] where it can readily be seen from the outside."

"[T]he Supreme Court has rejected this highly paternalistic approach to limiting speech, holding that the Government may not 'achieve its policy objectives through the indirect means of restraining certain speech by certain speakers,'" Nunley wrote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/12/judge-strikes-down-highly-paternalistic-california-law-banning-handgun-ads-slams-states-distrust-gun-buyers.html


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on September 12, 2018, 03:34:34 PM
Judge strikes down 'highly paternalistic' California law banning handgun ads, slams state's 'distrust' of gun buyers

A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama on Tuesday struck down a 95-year-old California law that had banned handgun ads at gun shops, calling it "unconstitutional on its face" and slamming the state for its "paternalistic" assumption that its residents can't make up their own minds about firearms.

Officials in California had claimed the advertisements would trigger people with “impulsive personality traits” to buy more handguns, leading to increased suicides and crime -- assertions that U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley in Sacramento all but mocked in his ruling.

"The Government may not restrict speech that persuades adults, who are neither criminals nor suffer from mental illness, from purchasing a legal and constitutionally protected product, merely because it distrusts their personality trait and the decisions that personality trait may lead them to make later down the road," Nunley said in the decision, which was made public Tuesday.

"Moreover, in the effort to restrict impulsive individuals from purchasing handguns, the Government has restricted speech to all adults, irrespective of whether they have this personality trait," Nunley added, saying the law was overinclusive.

The 1923 law provided that "No handgun or imitation handgun, or placard advertising the sale or other transfer thereof, shall be displayed in any part of [a gun store] where it can readily be seen from the outside."

"[T]he Supreme Court has rejected this highly paternalistic approach to limiting speech, holding that the Government may not 'achieve its policy objectives through the indirect means of restraining certain speech by certain speakers,'" Nunley wrote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/12/judge-strikes-down-highly-paternalistic-california-law-banning-handgun-ads-slams-states-distrust-gun-buyers.html
Ban handgun ads but encourage big pharma dependence by running drugs ads every commercial break constantly. ::)


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on November 05, 2018, 08:49:00 PM
Lawmakers Drafting Bill That Would Allow Social Media Checks Before Gun Purchase

Two New York lawmakers are working to draft a bill that would propose a social media check before a gun purchase.

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and state Sen. Kevin Palmer’s proposal would allow authorities to review three years of social media history and one year of internet search history of any person seeking to purchase a firearm.

“A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a fire arm,” Adams explains.

https://wcbs880.radio.com/articles/lawmakers-drafting-bill-would-allow-social-media-checks-gun-purchase


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on December 05, 2018, 06:54:24 PM
Tougher gun laws among new Nevada governor’s top priorities

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article222396475.html


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on December 05, 2018, 08:18:05 PM
Lawmakers Drafting Bill That Would Allow Social Media Checks Before Gun Purchase

Two New York lawmakers are working to draft a bill that would propose a social media check before a gun purchase.

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and state Sen. Kevin Palmer’s proposal would allow authorities to review three years of social media history and one year of internet search history of any person seeking to purchase a firearm.

“A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a fire arm,” Adams explains.

https://wcbs880.radio.com/articles/lawmakers-drafting-bill-would-allow-social-media-checks-gun-purchase

So who would be the "decider" of whats appropriate on social media and what's not?

If someone doesn't like the meme you shared you're banned for life from owning a gun?... or do you get to re-apply in 3 years after that meme disappeared?..lol

Sick


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on December 06, 2018, 04:00:34 PM
Slippery slope.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Moontrane on December 06, 2018, 04:49:37 PM
So who would be the "decider" of whats appropriate on social media and what's not?

If someone doesn't like the meme you shared you're banned for life from owning a gun?... or do you get to re-apply in 3 years after that meme disappeared?..lol

Sick

Slippery slope.

Very.  The Left (not liberals) will not stop until they ban firearms.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on December 06, 2018, 06:10:19 PM
Very.  The Left (not liberals) will not stop until they ban firearms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzDO86iSKWU


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Primemuscle on December 06, 2018, 07:00:02 PM
I'm looking forward to when this twat is an adult and we are allowed to question him and hold him accountable for his words and actions.

Don't invest too much in this. It will never happen.

Who are we?


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on December 17, 2018, 03:33:50 PM
More stupid laws regarding reduced magazine capacity. However, it's quite rich that when a law restricting magazine capacity doesn't make exceptions for off duty cops, the police commissioner throws a hissy fit. Why does he want 2 standards and have the law apply only to some but not to others? Sadly this mentality is not rare with several cops, who are used to be exempt from laws that restrict "normal" people but in the rare instance that they have to comply to the same set of laws and rules as everyone else suddenly they react.

'This Is Just Crazy': Former NYPD Commissioner Blasts NJ Gov. Over 'Insane' Gun Law

Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik slammed New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy over a gun law that bans off-duty officers in the state from carrying magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Kerik tweeted a leaked memo to law enforcement signed by Acting Bergen County Prosecutor Dennis Calo, which said violating the law would result in a fourth-degree crime.

According to NJ.com, Murphy (D) signed the bill into law in June, which also states that an officer may not be convicted of a criminal offense if he or she voluntarily surrenders a weapon in question.

Kerik said Sunday on Fox & Friends that the law is not only "outrageous," it also puts officers at risk.

"You're taking the ability away from the cops to possess the rounds they may need in a gun battle. ... That's insane," he said.

The law applies to New Jersey residents as well as off-duty officers, and Kerik said Murphy has essentially taken guns "away from the people" of the state.

"It's one thing if you violate a rule of a department," Kerik added. "But this is a law. A criminal law, and it makes you, then, a criminal. So, this is just crazy."


http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/12/16/new-jersey-gun-ammunition-law-bernard-kerik-former-nypd-commissioner-blasts-phil-murphy

To see just how restrictive and absurd the law is, read this:

New Jersey invites in violent criminal aliens while stripping citizens of the right to self-defense

When the clock strikes midnight Tuesday morning, anyone in New Jersey who owns a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition is officially in possession of illegal contraband and is deemed a fourth-degree felon. Unlike previous magazine bans, this one retroactively bans people from even owning such magazines in their homes, even though they had been purchased legally. At the same time, the most violent criminal aliens will be actively shielded from deportation by state officials, against federal law. The inmates are running the asylum, while the law-abiding citizens and federal law enforcement are treated like criminals.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/new-jersey-invites-in-violent-criminal-aliens-while-stripping-citizens-of-the-right-to-self-defense/


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Dos Equis on December 17, 2018, 03:55:25 PM
More stupid laws regarding reduced magazine capacity. However, it's quite rich that when a law restricting magazine capacity doesn't make exceptions for off duty cops, the police commissioner throws a hissy fit. Why does he want 2 standards and have the law apply only to some but not to others? Sadly this mentality is not rare with several cops, who are used to be exempt from laws that restrict "normal" people but in the rare instance that they have to comply to the same set of laws and rules as everyone else suddenly they react.

'This Is Just Crazy': Former NYPD Commissioner Blasts NJ Gov. Over 'Insane' Gun Law

Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik slammed New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy over a gun law that bans off-duty officers in the state from carrying magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Kerik tweeted a leaked memo to law enforcement signed by Acting Bergen County Prosecutor Dennis Calo, which said violating the law would result in a fourth-degree crime.

According to NJ.com, Murphy (D) signed the bill into law in June, which also states that an officer may not be convicted of a criminal offense if he or she voluntarily surrenders a weapon in question.

Kerik said Sunday on Fox & Friends that the law is not only "outrageous," it also puts officers at risk.

"You're taking the ability away from the cops to possess the rounds they may need in a gun battle. ... That's insane," he said.

The law applies to New Jersey residents as well as off-duty officers, and Kerik said Murphy has essentially taken guns "away from the people" of the state.

"It's one thing if you violate a rule of a department," Kerik added. "But this is a law. A criminal law, and it makes you, then, a criminal. So, this is just crazy."


http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/12/16/new-jersey-gun-ammunition-law-bernard-kerik-former-nypd-commissioner-blasts-phil-murphy

To see just how restrictive and absurd the law is, read this:

New Jersey invites in violent criminal aliens while stripping citizens of the right to self-defense

When the clock strikes midnight Tuesday morning, anyone in New Jersey who owns a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition is officially in possession of illegal contraband and is deemed a fourth-degree felon. Unlike previous magazine bans, this one retroactively bans people from even owning such magazines in their homes, even though they had been purchased legally. At the same time, the most violent criminal aliens will be actively shielded from deportation by state officials, against federal law. The inmates are running the asylum, while the law-abiding citizens and federal law enforcement are treated like criminals.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/new-jersey-invites-in-violent-criminal-aliens-while-stripping-citizens-of-the-right-to-self-defense/

Well that's dumb. 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Moontrane on December 17, 2018, 07:50:09 PM
More stupid laws regarding reduced magazine capacity. However, it's quite rich that when a law restricting magazine capacity doesn't make exceptions for off duty cops, the police commissioner throws a hissy fit. Why does he want 2 standards and have the law apply only to some but not to others? Sadly this mentality is not rare with several cops, who are used to be exempt from laws that restrict "normal" people but in the rare instance that they have to comply to the same set of laws and rules as everyone else suddenly they react.

'This Is Just Crazy': Former NYPD Commissioner Blasts NJ Gov. Over 'Insane' Gun Law

Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik slammed New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy over a gun law that bans off-duty officers in the state from carrying magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Kerik tweeted a leaked memo to law enforcement signed by Acting Bergen County Prosecutor Dennis Calo, which said violating the law would result in a fourth-degree crime.

According to NJ.com, Murphy (D) signed the bill into law in June, which also states that an officer may not be convicted of a criminal offense if he or she voluntarily surrenders a weapon in question.

Kerik said Sunday on Fox & Friends that the law is not only "outrageous," it also puts officers at risk.

"You're taking the ability away from the cops to possess the rounds they may need in a gun battle. ... That's insane," he said.

The law applies to New Jersey residents as well as off-duty officers, and Kerik said Murphy has essentially taken guns "away from the people" of the state.

"It's one thing if you violate a rule of a department," Kerik added. "But this is a law. A criminal law, and it makes you, then, a criminal. So, this is just crazy."


http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/12/16/new-jersey-gun-ammunition-law-bernard-kerik-former-nypd-commissioner-blasts-phil-murphy

To see just how restrictive and absurd the law is, read this:

New Jersey invites in violent criminal aliens while stripping citizens of the right to self-defense

When the clock strikes midnight Tuesday morning, anyone in New Jersey who owns a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition is officially in possession of illegal contraband and is deemed a fourth-degree felon. Unlike previous magazine bans, this one retroactively bans people from even owning such magazines in their homes, even though they had been purchased legally. At the same time, the most violent criminal aliens will be actively shielded from deportation by state officials, against federal law. The inmates are running the asylum, while the law-abiding citizens and federal law enforcement are treated like criminals.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/new-jersey-invites-in-violent-criminal-aliens-while-stripping-citizens-of-the-right-to-self-defense/

Unless there’s a state registry of what mags people have, the only folks facing prosecution will be
people committing crimes using guns with large mags and people lawfully defending themselves using guns with large mags.

Stupid law.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on December 18, 2018, 06:39:59 PM
Unless there’s a state registry of what mags people have, the only folks facing prosecution will be
people committing crimes using guns with large mags and people lawfully defending themselves using guns with large mags.

Stupid law.
Governor hasn't ruled out door to door searches. lol


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: TheGrinch on December 18, 2018, 07:02:11 PM
Governor hasn't ruled out door to door searches. lol


Step 1 ... dig hole..

Step 2 ..... what guns?... I don't have any guns officer


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on December 18, 2018, 07:06:51 PM
Step 1 ... dig hole..

Step 2 ..... what guns?... I don't have any guns officer
Lost my gun in a boating accident, it was terrible.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Moontrane on December 18, 2018, 08:23:40 PM
Governor hasn't ruled out door to door searches. lol


We have a similar law here in CA, but I don't think it applies to LEOs. 


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Pray_4_War on December 18, 2018, 08:44:42 PM
What they will do is just imprison the people that they catch not complying.   One at a time.  Throw the book at them.  Turn otherwise law abiding citizens into felons.

That will be enough to intimidate the rest into turning theirs over.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on December 18, 2018, 09:35:35 PM
We have a similar law here in CA, but I don't think it applies to LEOs. 
I'm in CA, we're all criminals according to our liberal government.

What they will do is just imprison the people that they catch not complying.   One at a time.  Throw the book at them.  Turn otherwise law abiding citizens into felons.

That will be enough to intimidate the rest into turning theirs over.
Almost never happens out here. Stories I've heard have always been confiscation and a slap on the wrist. Not saying it doesn't happen, just don't hear about it. Although here it's not a felony to possess, until you put it in the gun. Lol


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Moontrane on December 18, 2018, 10:25:34 PM
I'm in CA, we're all criminals according to our liberal government.
Almost never happens out here. Stories I've heard have always been confiscation and a slap on the wrist. Not saying it doesn't happen, just don't hear about it. Although here it's not a felony to possess, until you put it in the gun. Lol

UCMJ: Article 120

(c) Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete either of these offenses.

 :D


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: loco on December 19, 2018, 05:58:26 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0It68YxLQQ


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: chaos on December 19, 2018, 08:35:34 PM
UCMJ: Article 120

(c) Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete either of these offenses.

 :D
Just the tip, I promise.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on December 20, 2018, 11:58:41 AM
He's a "Second Amendment guy"...

Citing ‘rotten, stinking politics,’ Kasich vetoes gun bill

Saying that signing a gun rights measure “would be detrimental to the safety of all of our citizens,” Gov. John Kasich vetoed a bill Wednesday that would have shifted the burden of proof in self-defense cases.

“I’m a Second Amendment guy. I also believe there are some important restrictions we need to place on the Second Amendment,” the outgoing governor told the Columbus Metropolitan Club earlier Wednesday.

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20181219/citing-rotten-stinking-politics-kasich-vetoes-gun-bill


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on December 20, 2018, 02:46:19 PM
Trump administration moves to ban sale of bump stocks, make possession illegal by March

The Trump administration on Tuesday took first steps to ban the sale of bump stocks on semi-automatic weapons and has made them illegal to possess beginning in late March.

Bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly like automatic firearms, have come under increasing scrutiny after they were used in October 2017 when a man opened fire from his Las Vegas hotel suite into a crowd at a country music concert below, killing 58 people and injuring hundreds more in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

“Following the mass shooting in Las Vegas, ATF received correspondence from members of the United States Congress, as well as nongovernmental organizations, requesting that ATF examine its past classifications and determine whether bump-stock type devices available on the market constitute machineguns under the statutory definition,” the regulation, which was signed by Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker on Tuesday morning, noted.

It continued: “The Department decided to move forward with the rulemaking process to clarify the meaning of these terms, which are used in the NFA's  (National Firearms Act) statutory definition of ‘machinegun.’”

The regulation will go into effect 90 days after it is formally published in the Federal Register, which is expected to happen on Friday, a Justice Department official said.

People who own bump stocks will be required to either surrender them to the ATF or destroy them by late March, the official said. The change has undergone a legal review and the Justice Department and ATF are ready to fight any legal challenge that may be brought, the official added.

In March, President Donald Trump said his administration would "ban" the devices, which he said "turn legal weapons into illegal machines."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-moves-to-ban-sale-bump-stocks-makes-them-illegal-to-possess-by-march


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: AbrahamG on December 20, 2018, 04:04:57 PM
Trump administration moves to ban sale of bump stocks, make possession illegal by March

The Trump administration on Tuesday took first steps to ban the sale of bump stocks on semi-automatic weapons and has made them illegal to possess beginning in late March.

Bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly like automatic firearms, have come under increasing scrutiny after they were used in October 2017 when a man opened fire from his Las Vegas hotel suite into a crowd at a country music concert below, killing 58 people and injuring hundreds more in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

“Following the mass shooting in Las Vegas, ATF received correspondence from members of the United States Congress, as well as nongovernmental organizations, requesting that ATF examine its past classifications and determine whether bump-stock type devices available on the market constitute machineguns under the statutory definition,” the regulation, which was signed by Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker on Tuesday morning, noted.

It continued: “The Department decided to move forward with the rulemaking process to clarify the meaning of these terms, which are used in the NFA's  (National Firearms Act) statutory definition of ‘machinegun.’”

The regulation will go into effect 90 days after it is formally published in the Federal Register, which is expected to happen on Friday, a Justice Department official said.

People who own bump stocks will be required to either surrender them to the ATF or destroy them by late March, the official said. The change has undergone a legal review and the Justice Department and ATF are ready to fight any legal challenge that may be brought, the official added.

In March, President Donald Trump said his administration would "ban" the devices, which he said "turn legal weapons into illegal machines."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-moves-to-ban-sale-bump-stocks-makes-them-illegal-to-possess-by-march

Damn.  Syria, bump stocks and prison reform.  Pretty good week as far as I'm concerned.


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on December 27, 2018, 04:35:36 PM
He's a "Second Amendment guy"...

Citing ‘rotten, stinking politics,’ Kasich vetoes gun bill

Saying that signing a gun rights measure “would be detrimental to the safety of all of our citizens,” Gov. John Kasich vetoed a bill Wednesday that would have shifted the burden of proof in self-defense cases.

“I’m a Second Amendment guy. I also believe there are some important restrictions we need to place on the Second Amendment,” the outgoing governor told the Columbus Metropolitan Club earlier Wednesday.

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20181219/citing-rotten-stinking-politics-kasich-vetoes-gun-bill


Gun-owner rights bill becomes Ohio law after legislature overrode Kasich veto

A bill broadening gun-owner rights has become law in Ohio, after the Republican-led state Legislature overrode GOP Gov. John Kasich’s veto. The Senate voted 21-11 on Thursday to reject Kasich’s decision to strike down the bill. That followed a House override earlier in the day.

Kasich opposed language shifting the burden of proof in self-defense cases from defendants to prosecutors.

https://fox8.com/2018/12/27/ohio-house-overrides-gov-kasichs-veto-of-gun-owner-rights-bill/


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on January 05, 2019, 06:03:56 PM
A prominent supporter of gun control has been charged with attempted extortion. He’s been in that position for 50 fucking years, succeeding his father. And guess what, despite being a staunch gun control supporter, he had 23 guns in his offices, which he had to surrender as a condition of his bond. And these guns might have even been in government buildings, where signs were posted prohibiting anyone from bringing guns in the premises. But it seems he enjoyed some “special privileges” while he pushed for strict gun control for everybody else.

Feds: Burke thought he was ‘playing nice with ’em,’ then came the squeeze

According to a bombshell 37-page criminal complaint unsealed Thursday that charged the powerhouse alderman with attempted extortion. After serving on the City Council for nearly half a century, Burke faced a federal judge Thursday, accused of using his position as alderman to try to steer business toward his private firm.

Burke, 75, now faces a maximum of 20 years in prison following an investigation that involved recorded calls on Burke’s cellphone and apparent federal surveillance of the alderman.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/chicago-alderman-ed-burke-federal-court-case/


Why Ald. Ed Burke May Have Been Allowed To Have 23 Guns In Government Building

He’s been a staunch supporter of gun control measures for decades, but in a surprising twist, federal prosecutors revealed Thursday that nearly two dozen firearms were discovered in Ald. Ed Burke’s offices during their raids in November.

From outlawing cell phone cases shaped like guns to bans on concealed weapons in places that serve alcohol and broadening the gun offender registry in Chicago, Ald. Ed Burke’s aldermanic record has defined him as an ardent supporter of gun control.

That’s why many people did a double take when federal prosecutors announced that investigators had found nearly two dozen guns not in his home but in his offices.

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/01/04/ald-ed-burke-guns-govnerment-building/


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on February 13, 2019, 12:31:55 AM
Anything over 10 rounds would be considered "high capacity" and banned because according to them "you don't need that for any purpose". Of course they want the cops to be exempt from this ban.

Democrats propose high-capacity gun magazine ban

After a year without any significant gun legislation passed by Congress since the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting in Parkland, Florida, Democrats introduced a bill banning high-capacity gun magazines Tuesday, as the one-year anniversary of the massacre nears.

The Democratic legislation, cosponsored by Rep. Ted Deutch of Florida and Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, would ban any magazine that exceeds 10 rounds of ammunition. The legislation, which has been dubbed the "Keep Americans Safe Act," currently has no Republican cosponsors, one of many obstacles that would stand in the way of it advancing.

https://www.wptv.com/news/national/democrats-propose-high-capacity-gun-magazine-ban


Title: Re: Gun Control
Post by: Skeletor on February 13, 2019, 12:34:49 PM
Wow.

Los Angeles Demanding That City Contractors Disclose Ties to the NRA

The ordinance, enacted yesterday, states:

Each [contract] Awarding Authority shall require that a Person fully disclose prior to entering into a Contract, all of its and its Subsidiaries' contracts with or Sponsorships of the NRA.

The disclosure required under this section shall continue throughout the term of the Contract, thereby obligating a Person to update its disclosure each time the Person or its Subsidiary contracts with or enters into a Sponsorship with the NRA.


And it makes clear that it is motivated by the NRA's political advocacy, as you can see from the recitals at the start of the ordinance (e.g., "the NRA leadership, with the financial support of its dues paying members, continues to lobby against gun safety regulations").

But the Supreme Court has made clear that the First Amendment generally bans (see O'Hare Truck Service, Inc. v. City of Northlake (1997)) the government from "retaliat[ing] against a contractor, or a regular provider of services, for the exercise of rights of political association"—precisely what the ordinance implicitly threatens.

And the Court has also made clear that compulsory disclosures of political association is also presumptively unconstitutional, precisely because they deter such association, see Shelton v. Tucker (1960), a case requiring such disclosures of schoolteachers:

Quote
Even if there were no disclosure to the general public, the pressure upon a teacher to avoid any ties which might displease those who control his professional destiny would be constant and heavy. Public exposure, bringing with it the possibility of public pressures upon school boards to discharge teachers who belong to unpopular or minority organizations, would simply operate to widen and aggravate the impairment of constitutional liberty.

That case involved government employees, but the logic of O'Hare, which applied government employee First Amendment precedents to government contractors, makes clear that it applies to government contractors, too.

https://reason.com/volokh/2019/02/13/los-angeles-demanding-that-city-contract