Tom has hit on the fact that seems to escape so many who are rampant to ban guns. (no, I'm not speaking of Buck T here) But in the case of guns let's attack a tiny piece of the puzzle, not even a significant piece of the pie. Here's something interesting. From the FBI's crime stats. For the years 2007 through 2011 there were 1874 homicides committed with rifles. (Remember, assault style weapons are a small SUBSET of rifles) In 2009, there were 1836 people killed with knives, and in 2010 it was 1732. In 2011 it fell to 1694. Now the Pres and Congress wants to ban an insignificant sample of homicide weapons because that will make us so much safer???? What about the knives? They kill as many in a year as rifles do in 5... SO... instead of unifying the laws that make it hard for a person of questionable background to get a gun, and severely punishing those who use them in a crime, they'd rather focus on something that will not remotely solve the problem especially when you consider they are exempting so many of the guns they hate... Yep... that's our government. :roll: :roll:
BTW... somebody tell me how the new restrictions being proposed would have in any way stopped what happened today??? Shooting Rampage in Cali
Scott, my understanding is that it's looking increasingly likely that the bills that will make it to the floor for debate and serious consideration will not include bans on any weapons or mags. No legislation nor regulatory framework is going to make the problem disappear.....that should not prevent us from taking steps in the right direction.
Well I'm not understanding how banning the most popular sporting rifle owned by hundreds of thousands of law abiding firearms enthusiasts is going to be a step in the right direction especially when fewer people are murdered by rifles of ANY kind than are murdered by hands and fists.
Stu, the most recent info I have seen is that the bills that will make it to the floor do not include a ban on assault weapons. While Feinstein is sponsoring a bill that includes weapons bans, there is significant resistance to it. The compromise focus is on universal background checks and strengthening the data base. Most polling suggests that a majority of citizens do not support an assault weapons ban. In my view, any progress is good progress.....
BT....the statement that "most Americans do not support" an assault weapons ban didn't seem right to me: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/other-races/273955-poll-majority-support-assault-weapons-ban "The poll found that nearly four in five Americans support some gun control in some form and 62 percent back a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles and high-capacity magazine clips." I can't imagine why average non gun toting Americans wouldn't want assault weapons banned.
620 Americans without knowing anything else is not a poll that has enough data to make that broad statement.
Most of the polls that I have seen either oppose a ban or the difference is statistically insignificant....there are dozens and dozens of polls, the point is here is that there is not overwhelming support for the measure, unlike the support for universal background checks. http://www.gallup.com/poll/159569/americans-stricter-gun-laws-oppose-bans.aspx
Have a couple thoughts about "universal" background checks but hard to type long posts on cell phone. Will do so later today but still stuck on a trip with only a minitablet in hotel room. Concept of the checks is good but implementation problematic.
Background checks for any gun should be intense......but to varying degrees if problematic. Sport style shotguns.....ok... a check but not so extensive. Assault weapons and handguns.......put through the ringer checks.....no matter how problematic or expensive...... and with either you should be required to appear a year later with the weapon and undergo a follow-up background check. You can't produce the weapon? You are banned for life in owning said weapons. Still.....the asshole here in Tampa who brought his licensed handgun to what should have been your average neighborhood squabble... and murdered the father of the 8 year old in front of her.....that asshole is still going to be an asshole "standing his ground"..... :roll: :roll:
I can put a 3" deer slug in a 12 gauge shotgun and it will penetrate a 6 ft tall propane tank (twice the wall thickness of a standard backyard grill tank) when even a .50 cal Desert Eagle will not. A 5.56 cal AR-15 will not. Know your facts before you try to suggest "levels". What happens when I trade a gun at a legal gun store? What happens when I sell the gun through a FFL holder? This guy may be guilt as guilty can get. However, you have crucified him before his day in court and yo have only read a short article that is tainted by the opinions of the writer. I prefer to get 100% of the facts before being guilty of killing this guy in the media.
Home or business invasion stopped by AR-15... well at least most people think that guns fire themselves so why not. http://video.foxnews.com/v/2174510822001/
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_hillsborough/trevor-dooley-convicted-of-killing-neighbor-on-a-basketbaal-court-in-2010-faces-sentencing-today Without the presence of a gun..... I seriously doubt the father of the 8 year old physically abuses the 71 year old black man in front of the girl. It appears the fact that a gun was present escalated everything.... and possibly the shooter was misguided by his interpretation of the "stand your ground" law.....in that he felt it was ok to shoot another if that person showed aggression and did not agree with his opinion. In any event....because there was a gun brought to the dispute..... a young girl's father is dead..... and previously clean record 71 year old now will spend 8 years in prison. Senseless tragedy brought about by the proliferation of guns in America and by the license to kill "stand your ground " law in Florida.
That law is not only in Florida. It is called different things in different states. Before this law, even if you were afraid for your life, you could be 600 lbs and 50 years old with a 18 year old sprinter attacking you and you would still have to retreat before legally shooting your attacker. Texas has this law now but you have to prove you were in fear of your life. You no longer have to retreat. As a 54 year old out of shape male with artificial knees, I am not going to let someone attack me without them suffering the consequences. With that said, I do not go to areas known to be trouble. I do not antagonize individuals into a confrontation. I will be the mild mannered person that will sit there and take it until it gets physical. You will think that I am scared and unable to handle myself. Once the attack rises to the level that I fear for my life, the attacker will lose his. I am not looking for trouble but when trouble looks for me, I am prepared to defend myself and my family. If I see you (meaning anyone else) being attacked, I will do nothing but laugh while your unprepared body is being ripped apart by the scum of the earth. Unless I or my family is in fear, I could care less. I will not go to jail to protect those who chastise me for being prepared to defend myself.
The law has good intentions....but as in this case sometimes tragic consequences.....and I have not even mentioned Trayvon Martin.... the unarmed black kid shot and killed by a security wannabe over in the middle of the state. The fact remains in the earlier case above that if the black grandpa goes out to argue the skateboard rules of the neighborhood with the white father and leaves his gun behind then that 8 year old girl has her father alive and well and the grandpa retreats to his home's easy chair after some exchange of harsh words.....but not deadly gunfire.
Point one: Why do you have to point out race? That has nothing to do with the story other than to incite a race riot. Point two: If you are licensed to carry, you know that you do not "leave your gun behind" when you "argue the rules". If you are licensed, at least in Texas, you are taught that while armed, you do not argue JACK! You do everything you can to avoid situations and never offensively confront anyone. Point three: Where is he going to leave the gun when this situation starts? Behind a bush where a kid could find it and accidentally kill himself? Dave, seriously, you don't know enough about the legalities and techniques of being legally armed. Your words paint that picture. You're not far off but I think you have several wrong impressions.
Dave I think you may have the races turned around if I read the article and your posts right. I'm thinking Grandpa with the gun was white. Stand your ground laws do not give you the right to start a confrontation and then cry "self defense" when it escalates. Maybe...just maybe...if the other guy pulls out a knife or a crowbar...but even then if you are legally carrying (nothing I saw discussed if this guy was legal or not) you had best not start any fights because if you do the consequences are on you, as they should be. This is kind of a read my lips statement: STAND YOUR GROUND LAWS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE....THEY WERE PROPERLY DISALLOWED. And they may not apply in the Martin case either...it depends on the jury's decision of just what happened.
Terry the so-called gunshow loophole is a bit of a myth. It is really the ability for non-firearms dealers to transfer, trade or sell privately. That may be a policy we should have a debate on, and it may sound like or even be a policy with merit, but two problems; First it would prohibit transfers between friends, next-door neighbors, family,etc. That means I couldn't even give my weapons to my kids ithout a background check. I couldn't sell my shotgun to a fellow trap shooter at a trap meet. And even that is doable (go through a licensed FFL for a small fee.) The rub is in the second problem. The only...ONLY...way to enforce this is to register all the guns. I see no other way and that is actually the NRAs position as I understand it. You have demonized them (us) a bit and distorted...a bit...where they are coming from IMHO. The NRA was, I believe, (perhaps reluctantly) in favor of the original background checks law as written. They are adament that states haven't taken steps to put mentally ill on the list nor have they prosecuted felons for trying to buy guns...just turned them down. The gun show thing is a bit of a media side show...."lets send 60 minutes in and interview all these hillbillys and document their bypassing the background checks." Most sales at gunshows are by FFLs and go through background checks. Very very few guns that are used in crimes have come from gun show sales.
MEXICO CAN KISS ANGRY WHITE DUDE’S CULO! Home - by Cardigan - February 20, 2013 - 17:00 America/New_York - 12 Comments ANGRY WHITE DUDE There are two damn things in this mundo AWD doesn’t give one damn about and both of them are anything the corrupt hellhole of Mexico says or does! I hate Mexico. I hate a country so corrupt and worthless that it has to export its citizens to America because it cannot create jobs or sustain an economy sufficient to keep its people there. I hate a country that plays upon the goodwill and political correctness of its neighbor to the north to feed its people. I hate a country that allows drug cartels to dominate and terrorize the innocent people living in Mexico. Especially when the government is in bed with the drug-running savages. I hate a country that sues American states for passing common-sense immigration laws to protect its citizens from the violent swarms of illegal aliens from their southern neighbor. That’s Mexico. And that’s why I hate Mexico! Mexico is not an ally of America. Quite the contrary. Mexican lawmakers are asking the U.S. Senate to create a registry of all commercialized firearms in border states like California, Arizona, New Mexico, and my beloved Lone Star State of Texas. Mexico says gun registration will make it easier for them to trace guns used in violent attacks. Mexico isn’t sophisticated enough to track their own ass with both hands and a map! They would be much better off tracking the guns sold to drug cartels by Hopenchange and his chief thug, Eric Holder. Why should we be surprised? Me-hee-co is only doing what all other enemies of America are doing these days in calling for gun registrations and gun controls that penalize law-abiding Americans. The mainstream propaganda media, China, Democrats, the Communist Party USA, Democrats (same thing), Juan McPain, Eric Holder, and the supreme American enemy, one Barack Hussein Hopenchange Soetoro Obama all are working hard to build momentum for gun registration and “universal background checks.” And universal background checks and gun registration only lead to one thing if history has taught us anything. Gun confiscation. And gun confiscation has only lead to one thing if history has taught us anything. Mass murder of civilians at the hand of tyrannical governments. MORE http://angrywhitedude.com/2013/02/mexico-can-kiss-angry-white-dudes-culo/