Regarding the recent gun bill defeat.

Not sure which way you are going except in circles. One moment you say no then the next moment you post experts that are all over the place and even saying yes. So what is it?

 

It really is all politics isn't it? Still, it seemed the bills all wanted to include that whole "you're on a list so you have no rights" thing which I cannot endorse. The one backed by the NRA came close, where the government had 3 days to challenge a gun purchase if someone was on said list, but even then it's likely the reason would be "it's a secret" and the judge would agree with preventing the sale.

 

The AR15 is an excellent platform for a home defense role.

 

That's true.

I mean there were these muslim guys in France that tried to plan out these coordinated, simultaneous attacks in Paris.

Thanks to France's ban on automatic weapons and explosives, none of them were successful.

The list of attacks prevented:

Train attack with automatic weapons

Attack on Charlie Hebdo

Café Attacks

Massive simultaneous attack in multiple spots

Thanks France, your gun laws saved many people. If it hadn't been for those laws, many people would have died.

 

Omitted nothing, really don't care what the second or any other amendment says. It does not apply to me either way. If your only rights are want is delineated in a government document, then you are most welcome to the 14th Amendment good little citizen where privileges prevail and the 2nd amendment is suspended.

Over the decades, those funny little actors in black robes and their sworn cohorts, those BAR members sworn to a foreign cause, have determined they have some authority to interpret that which needs no interpretation. They have not only usurped the 2nd amendment but have expanded that which pleases them and contracted that which would diminish their authority.

But tell me just where they got any authority for any of this, especially prohibition of that which is labeled, "shall not infringe"?

Assault weapon ban, are you really serious? Would you know an assault weapon even if hit up side the head with one? A AR-15 is not an assault weapon. An M16 is assault but weak. I much prefer the AK47 or the ultimate for small fights without help carrying ammo, the M60, now that is assault.

But then your tone seems to be that of one of those bleeding heart liberals that somehow believe you have some superior right over another and can dictate another's actions.

 

yes its all a sham, telling us they care, and are willing to do anything if republicans would just work with them... well there it is, republicans gave them TWO bills, and they voted both down, so thats literally two chances in one day they could have strengthened gun laws, but they chose not to, out of spite it wasn't their bill...

democrats had a chance to do something, they chose willfully to do nothing... it was their way or the highway... and now they are having a sit-in for propaganda to make it look like they are trying to do something, when they could have voted yes two different times that day... instead they clearly sent a resounding NO they don't care at all...

 

Hey the SW 9mm I once used in combat shooting as minor (small caliber jacked to 1200 fps) held 14+1 but I could put 18 rounds of 2 rounds per 4 ring in the space of 10 seconds with two clip changes (3 clips total) and I was slow compared to some of the tournament shooters.

Looks? Probably because it "sounds" scary, an assault weapon. And then:



Wanna dance?

 

Exactly my point. Many of these shooters go get these rifles because they think they are superior so if we ban them all it will do is make these guys go get pistols and practice and become even more deadly. Especially in confined areas like a club or a classroom.

 

To the determent of the manufacturers profits would be more appropriate. But that still little diminishes the fact that both you and the NRA have something in common. Somehow perceiving you have some superior right to determine another's rights. Both of you are willing to accept compromises when you have no right to diminish in any way the rights of another.

Not a fact at all, there are many regulations in place to totally ban weapons unless one kowtows to the tyrants. So at what point does a total ban for all come into effect? One small group after one small group until all are covered. Weapons not totally banned, it's just the people aren't allowed to own them except criminals.

 

Great...ban all semi autos

 

So what you are saying basically is you are all for violating civil rights if democrats want it. Also only one senator voted against the Patriot Act so no change from dems voting to violate rights.

 

Wait a minute, just a second....




I know this.....





1775 and this nation became somewhat free, just 13 little tyrants left. But then those 13 got together and here we are.

The real question is when it will happen again. That's right not "if", "when".

- - - Updated - - -

Really?

 

Funny part is I'm sure Democrats will soon be starting lectures on how we need to "compromise". No idea how that word came to mean "do what I say".

 

Thankful for all they did. Imagine that, one set of tyrants prevent the other set of tyrants from becoming more tyrannical because it wasn't them.

Now if only that would do that always or better yet just quit and go home, hopefully one without guns and a big sign in the front yard stating so.

 

Wow, I do believe you have deciphered the code.

 

The defeat of this bill just points out the power that the NRA holds over the GOP.

And they always will.

 

What is funny about this is that non-law enforcement agencies of government have been buying up AR-15s and tons of ammunition. Now these jokers are trying to tell us there is n use for them.

 

And there it is.

 

So you are going to discriminate against some poor soul that is a bad shot?

 

The NRA knows that if these dems pass a bill that states you can't own a gun if you are involved in a terrorist group, what prevents Hillary or Barrack Hussain from naming the NRA a terrorist group? Tea party are terrorists, can not trust the dems .

 

I do feel the need to point out that there were 4 bills introduced. Two by the Democrats and two by the Republicans.......neither passed so both sides are to blame. Not the NRA nor the GOP.

 

its the same way they have redefined the word "advantage" to mean "equality"... among countless other examples the past decade... I mean look how they have slowly redefined "illegal alien" to the point NOBODY says it anymore... at worst they say "illegal immigrants", they've already won by redefining that and softening the image...

illegal alien...
illegal immigrant...
undocumented immigrant...
undocumented citizen..

I mean need we say more, they've moved words and redefined them outright... they soften images on one hand and vilify them on the other... assault weapons anyone?

tactical rifles...
military rifles...
assault rifles...
assault weapons...
military grade assault weapons...

they use words to change emotion, they literally are master manipulators... and they're damn good at using the media and internet...

 

Absolutely correct. Both sides are hypocrites of the highest order on civil liberties.

I'll also point out that the Patriot Act was 100% bipartisan. Even its renewal under Obama.

 

The Patriot Act is only law today because Imam Obama renewed it.

 

Why Terrorists Target Gun-Free Zones

Because they're terrorists - not idiots.

Just a couple of months ago, a young ISIS sympathizer planned a shooting at one of the largest churches in Detroit. An FBI wire recorded him explaining why he had picked the church as a target: "It's easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news."

http://nypost.com/2016/06/15/why-terrorists-target-gun-free-zones/

92% of the mass shootings during the Obama era occurred in "gun-free" zones.