Missouri Democrats propose forcing some gun owners to destroy, surrender weapons Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/17/mmissouri-democrats-propose-forcing-some-gun-owners-to-destroy-surrender/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz2LESCz8oy
Tom, I don't see it, just sounds like more LaPierre scare tactics. I haven't seen these provisions in any of the more likely versions of legislation at the federal level. Speaking of LaPierre, he doesn't appear to be interested in solving the problem but rather feathering his own nest and some of his historical political supporters are starting to question his leadership. I agree, I think the guy is doing more harm than good..... http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...rre-will-nra-members-suffer-the-consequences/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/14/msnbcs-joe-scarborough-blasts-nras-wayne-lapierre-/
Just understand BT... we stood by and watched while Obama won his first election. Conservatives thought: "Who would ever vote for someone with the middle name like his. We woke up the next morning thinking WHAT??? Look what he has done as far as the debt. Liberalism at work. We have liberals buying ads in a San Fransisco newspaper telling hunters that they should be ashamed killing animals for food when they should be going to the store where they make the meat without harming animals. These idiots VOTE!!! It has been the idea of Democratic presidents for ages to model America after socialistic European nations. Obama has us part of the way now with very little hope of turning the tide in the next election with all the votes on the dole. Ireland payroll tax is 58%. I've seen the paycheck stubs of Intel employees that showed them to me to allow me to see what socialism costs. Name a few socialist governments that allow their subjects to carry a concealed firearm. The trend points to the end being near.
If you make more than 1.4 million in France... the rate goes to 75%!!! I'd say there aren't many millionaires left in Frog country!
Mexico To Ask U.S. Senate To Create Registry Of Gun Owners In Border States… Via The Blaze: Mexican lawmakers will ask the U.S. Senate to create a registry of all commercialized firearms in border states, which includes California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Mexico says it will make it easier to trace guns used in violent attacks. The measure was reportedly approved on January 9 by Mexico’s Permanent Commission, a government entity that meets when Mexico’s Senate and the Chamber of Deputies is in recess. Gun owners in Arizona are calling the proposal “foolish” and an “invasion of privacy.” http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/18/why-is-mexico-asking-the-u-s-senate-for-a-registry-of-u-s-gun-owners/
http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/02/17/chicago-police-chief-second-amendment-is-a-danger-to-public-safety/
Name any that had a constitution guaranteeing their rights and a republican majority in the House?? I think we're safe from the great socialist revolution for the time being.....
Fortunately we have a Supreme Court to interpret it for him....they have spoken very clearly on the Second Amendment.
Because of gun ownership an 8 year old girl had to watch her father die over a simple skateboard argument: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/22/1076889/-Black-Shooter-of-White-Victim-in-Florida-Claimed-Stand-Your-Ground-still-went-to-Court And this beautiful girl died after being shot through the head in a bizare incident last year in her father's church: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/02/18/pastors-daughter-accidentally-shot-in-the-head-in-church-dies/ And these two stories are just a couple of local Tampa area incidents. Guns kill innocent people.....or they escalate confrontations into deadly arguments.
You go sell your guns if you ever had any BT and I'll hold on to mine. I believe in the ideals of our forefathers and will defend the constitution. I will be subservient to no tyrant dictator. Any time there is a shooting in this country, the liberal crazies attack guns. Why not attack the root of the problem? Thugs, punks, drugs, criminal intent, mental problems, alcohol, etc. I sat and watched my guns all day yesterday and not one of them fired or otherwise went off. It takes a finger pulling the trigger for the firearm to "go off". Nobody has ever answered my question posed several times: [b]How many lives are lost to alcohol related auto accidents each and every year?[/b] What useful purpose does alcohol serve? Why do we not have a proportional outcry from all concerned over the consumption of alcohol? I think we ought to close down every bar and destroy every ounce of drinkable alcohol. If you are truly interested in saving innocent lives, agreement should be your response. Once the huge killers are removed and the bell curve shifts to gun related violence without any contributing factors, then I might entertain thoughts on so called gun control.
DailyKos is worse than FoxNews fyi. Not saying it didn't happen, but surely there has to be a better source on the story.
Neither of the stories I posted prominently discussed any of the above Tom. And no matter the source...the stories are true...factual.....did happen and were major news here in the Tampa area. Makes you wonder what other similar tragedies are occurring every day around America. I look at the photo of that beautiful girl who was so innocently attending church.....only to lose her life to gun carelessness.....and it tears at your heart strings as a parent.
I've had them virtually my entire life and I will hold onto mine as well Tom and in addition will hold true to the ideals of our forefathers and will defend the constitution right next to you my friend. I simply don't find the constitution under assault and find that line of argument more a product of NRA scare tactics without any real basis in fact. As I have argued before and will continue, this country has long placed prudent and reasonable limits on the exercise of our constitutional rights when the unrestricted exercise risks the general welfare of the people....we must remember that protecting the general welfare of the people is the purpose of the document. One doesn't hear about attacks on the constitution when one is restricted from exercising his rights to free speech by not allowing anybody to yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre, or talk about guns and/or bombs and explosives in a TSA security screening. Where is the outrage???? How about laws prohibiting slander and libel that restrict free speech and press??? Where is the outrage?? How about laws that restrict the peoples right to assemble on public property or that of private individuals without their consent? Where is the outrage??? All of those laws restrict the people from exercising their rights guaranteed by our constitution. Where is the outrage? Where is LaPierre and deep pocketed lobbyists and gun manufacturer and other special interest bedfellows? We have a long history of restricting the unfettered exercise of such constitutionally guaranteed rights when it's not in the interest of the general welfare of the people and there is no outrage, because it is in our interest and just makes sense to do so......the same is true in this case. We now have a culture and regulatory framework that allows deadly weapons into the hands of too many that are unworthy of that responsibility and as such endanger the general welfare of the people. It needs to be improved and the overwhelming majority of citizens - 90% or so - are supportive of such improvements. Our elected representatives have a duty to address the issue exactly as the constitution provides..... RE: Alcohol.....we tried that once. We had a constitutional amendment to that effect. The overwhelming will of the people decided that they much preferred to drink, just as the constitution provides. No, don't put me in the camp with our Gator friend.....all guns don't kill people. Guns in the hands of those unworthy of the inherent responsibility of their possession kill people.....and there are millions of them and we as a society have an obligation to address that massive and costly societal problem. If Lapierre and his ilk were to back universal background checks - as he once did conveniently not at present tho - we could begin to address the problem tomorrow......that he does not, for purely political reasons, is a crime against humanity, imho
As I remember the look in the face of an 18 year old girl as she died in my arms in 1999 when her driver fell into an alcohol induced sleep and slammed into a bridge abutment. A bit different from seeing an undamaged face in print I guarantee you Dave! Damn it... I repeat: How many lives are lost to alcohol related auto accidents each and every year? This was before I was a member of any Fire Department. I was visiting friends in Dallas area over the weekend between two weeks of class. I still lived in Albuquerque but was attending this two week class in Austin. It was close to midnight and there was a car about 100 to 200 yards in front of me. I had called into 911 to report that the car was not holding in it's lane. About a minute later, it veered off the road and hit the bridge. I was the only one on scene for about 5 minutes. The police showed up at about the 10 minute mark and the ambulance didn't arrive until the helicopter was landing. That was over 13 years ago and I still see her face in my sleep.
Dammit Tom.....that was a sad story. Sorry you had to go through that......and I agree that alcohol kills many more Americans each year than gun violence. But DUIs are increasingly enforced in the U.S. today and the laws against DUI have been toughened and strenghthened and there is no "rights group" such as the NRA trying to lobby Congress to protect the "rights" of people to drink and drive.
I've steered clear of this conversation because I can't add anything. I support the Second Amendment rights. I do not own a gun. Period. However, the idiocy of the comment below is so void of rational thought that I am moved to reply: First of all, there is MAAD and SAAD, well organized groups which call attention to the "rights" of citizens to be free from the threats to life and safety posed by drunk drivers. Second, how do you rationalize equating constitutionally legal and responsible gun ownership with drinking and driving? I've said it before and I'll say it again......Unbelievable! :roll:
Thanks Sid. OK... and your point is?? I am 200% for throwing people under the jail for any of the following gun related issues: 1) Illegally carrying 2) Illegally discharging 3) Illegally harming 4) Illegally killing Notice a trend here? It is illegal to drink and drive and we are happy to just punish those that do so, not eliminate the possibility of doing so. So, by that policy, why is it not ok to simply throw the book at those that would ignore the law concerning guns? There are responsible people that drink. They have designated drivers, taxis, etc. There are irresponsible people that kill behind the wheel just as there are irresponsible people that kill with guns. Get rid of the problem... irresponsible people!