PDA

View Full Version : McConnell Shows Some Backbone…



Taxcutter
04-09-2013, 11:01 AM
…over the Senate gun-grabbing bill.

Remember Nasty Nancy’s famous comment about having to pass ObamaTax in order to find out what’s in it? Not on the gun theft bill.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/292465-mcconnell-will-block-gun-bill-until-he-gets-more-details-

Background checks would not have stopped Newtown. So why bother with them?

McConnell knows he better not betray the people on this issue. He is nowhere near as untouchable as Dick Lugar thought he was.

bladimz
04-09-2013, 11:16 AM
Worms don't have backbones.

nic34
04-09-2013, 11:18 AM
Background checks would not have stopped Newtown. So why bother with them?



Voter ID laws wouldn't stop voter fraud, so why have them?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:21 AM
The Retugs are showing themselves for what they really are .. spineless, gutless, cowards.


http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/2013/130409-as-sandy-hook-parents-come-to-dc-mcconnell-joins-gun-bill-filibuster.jpg

hanger4
04-09-2013, 11:24 AM
The Retugs are showing themselves for what they really are .. spineless, gutless, cowards.




What ?? in the Presidents proposals on gun control

would have averted Sandy Hook ??

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:26 AM
What ?? in the Presidents proposals on gun control

would have averted Sandy Hook ??

Yes

hanger4
04-09-2013, 11:28 AM
Yes

So you don't know ??

Why does that not surprise me.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:30 AM
Voter ID laws wouldn't stop voter fraud, so why have them?

????????????????????????????????????????????

WHAT? Please explain!!!

Mister D
04-09-2013, 11:33 AM
Yes

How?

Ransom
04-09-2013, 11:35 AM
Worms don't have backbones.

Neither do jellyfish or Democrats

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:35 AM
The Retugs are showing themselves for what they really are .. spineless, gutless, cowards.


http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/2013/130409-as-sandy-hook-parents-come-to-dc-mcconnell-joins-gun-bill-filibuster.jpg

And Yet the Dems want to keep expanding the Gun Free Zones and that is the sure way to promote these shooting?

And CIGAR maybe you can tell me how having laws on the book but refusing to prosicute those who break them is going to stop violence!

Because you President and His Attn General! have a really crappy record on prosicution of felony firearm laws?????

Maybe you can tell me why they do not waht to prosicute these offenders, all while pretending to give a shit!

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&gs_rn=8&gs_ri=psy-ab&pq=hampton+inn&cp=16&gs_id=1c&xhr=t&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44990110,d.dmQ&biw=1366&bih=597&wrapid=tljp136552047033728&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=hampton+inn+grand+rapids&fb=1&gl=us&hq=hampton+inn&hnear=0x88185460bb502815:0xa593aacb1bd3a8d0,Grand+ Rapids,+MI&sa=X&ei=WjBkUZvgCIqV0QGdxYCIDA&sqi=2&ved=0COkBELYD&iwloc=cids:16081731020441926969

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:36 AM
So you don't know ??

Why does that not surprise me.

So you're certain beyond a doubt, that is Adam has to reload or place another gun in his shooting hand ,,, "no one" would have ad a chance to get away?

You may want to look up the Gabby Gifford's shooting for reference. :wink:

Or are you certain it would have made zero difference, because all the people would have just stud in place a waited for him to reset.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:38 AM
And Yet the Dems want to keep expanding the Gun Free Zones and that is the sure way to promote these shooting?

And CIGAR maybe you can tell me how having laws on the book but refusing to prosicute those who break them is going to stop violence!

Because you President and His Attn General! have a really crappy record on prosicution of felony firearm laws?????

Maybe you can tell me why they do not waht to prosicute these offenders, all while pretending to give a shit!

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&gs_rn=8&gs_ri=psy-ab&pq=hampton+inn&cp=16&gs_id=1c&xhr=t&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44990110,d.dmQ&biw=1366&bih=597&wrapid=tljp136552047033728&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=hampton+inn+grand+rapids&fb=1&gl=us&hq=hampton+inn&hnear=0x88185460bb502815:0xa593aacb1bd3a8d0,Grand+ Rapids,+MI&sa=X&ei=WjBkUZvgCIqV0QGdxYCIDA&sqi=2&ved=0COkBELYD&iwloc=cids:16081731020441926969



You guys are going down ... just a matter of time ... it's only 47 states to go. :laugh:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:44 AM
So you're certain beyond a doubt, that is Adam has to reload or place another gun in his shooting hand ,,, "no one" would have ad a chance to get away?

You may want to look up the Gabby Gifford's shooting for reference. :wink:

Or are you certain it would have made zero difference, because all the people would have just stud in place a waited for him to reset.

Ready Set GO!

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

How far did you get???

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:50 AM
You guys are going down ... just a matter of time ... it's only 47 states to go. :laugh:

So you can't tell me why Holder and Obama don't prosicute gun crimes????

And if you really cared about this issue you would be upset that they refuse to prosicute these crimes! So are you saying that that you really dont' give a shit about the results!

And by the way, Obama has given up on Mag restrictions and Assult weapons ban, now just going of r expanded background checks which the Republicans are for as long as it does not include registry!

So now we just need to put armed guards in the schools and we can stop doing what will not work and do something that will work!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:51 AM
Ready Set GO!

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

How far did you get???



Yeaaaaaaaaaaa Right ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, :biglaugh:

http://media.telemundolasvegas.com/images/adam+lanza+fxx.jpg

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:54 AM
oh! I am sorry, he had to reload 5 times as it is, AND YOU DEMS HAVE BEEN TELLING US THAT HE WAS HIGHLY TRAINED?

So where you lying then, or now? You can't have it both ways.

And just so you know I could train you to make that reload that fast in about 5 min! It is not that tough, and if you add a couple features to your weapon i can get it in about half that time!

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 11:55 AM
Still waitng

why is it ok for obama nad friends to not prosicute gun crimes?

And then pretend to care about gun control?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:55 AM
So you can't tell me why Holder and Obama don't prosicute gun crimes????

And if you really cared about this issue you would be upset that they refuse to prosicute these crimes! So are you saying that that you really dont' give a shit about the results!

And by the way, Obama has given up on Mag restrictions and Assult weapons ban, now just going of r expanded background checks which the Republicans are for as long as it does not include registry!

So now we just need to put armed guards in the schools and we can stop doing what will not work and do something that will work!

NEXT!

Columbine High School Had Armed Guard During Massacre In 1999http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html

http://lem.ch.unito.it/didattica/infochimica/2008_Esplosivi/Immagini/nuclear-explosion.jpg

Cigar
04-09-2013, 11:58 AM
Still waitng

why is it ok for obama nad friends to not prosicute gun crimes?

And then pretend to care about gun control?

Because when you're The President of The United States, you can do whatever the Fuck you want without your Fucking permission.

If you don't believe me, ask these turds ...

http://pracownia4.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/rumsfeld-bush-cheney.jpg

hanger4
04-09-2013, 11:59 AM
So you're certain beyond a doubt, that is Adam has to reload or place another gun in his shooting hand ,,, "no one" would have ad a chance to get away?

You may want to look up the Gabby Gifford's shooting for reference. :wink:

Or are you certain it would have made zero difference, because all the people would have just stud in place a waited for him to reset.

Lanza expended 154 rounds in five minutes. He reloaded six times.

If he had only ten round magazines he would have had to carry 15 additional magazines

instead of the nine he carried in order to expend the same number of rounds.

Allowing four seconds per reload (and that's generous) Lanza would have needed an additional 40 seconds at most

to do what he did, probably less, since half of the magazines weren't empty.


Banning high capacity magazines won't solve a thing.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 11:59 AM
As you can see, Cigar is not familiar with weapons.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:01 PM
YOU CALL THIS A SECURITY GUARD.

KIDS SHOOTING IN A SCHOOL AND YOU NEED A CALL FROM THE JANITOR, WHILE YOU ARE EATING LUNCH?????????

THAT IS NOT A SECURITY GUARD THAT IS A JOKE!

LETS GET REAL. YOU HAVE TO HAVE REAL SECURITY. AS YOU CAN SEE THIS ARTICAL USES THIS TO SHOW THAT GUARDS WON'T WORK, AND I AGREE IF YOU CALL THIS A GUARD!

However if you put a real guard, and one that is trained in active shooter situations, then you have a real chance of stopping these killings very quickly!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/12/21/columbine_armed_guard_colorado_shooting_shows_that _nra_s_shield_program.html

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:03 PM
Lanza expended 154 rounds in five minutes. He reloaded six times.

If he had only ten round magazines he would have had to carry 15 additional magazines

instead of the nine he carried in order to expend the same number of rounds.

Allowing four seconds per reload (and that's generous) Lanza would have needed an additional 40 seconds at most

to do what he did, probably less, since half of the magazines weren't empty.


Banning high capacity magazines won't solve a thing.

Count 1 to 40 ... and I bet even your Butt Buddies can get out of a room in less than 40 seconds.

:biglaugh: that's if you don't turn too fast snap their rod.

Thanks for playing ... you're a real sport. :laugh:

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:04 PM
NEXT!

Columbine High School Had Armed Guard During Massacre In 1999

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html


12 students and a teacher were killed.

How many more without the armed guard ??

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:06 PM
Count 1 to 40 ... and I bet even your Butt Buddies can get out of a room in less than 40 seconds.

:biglaugh: that's if you don't turn too fast snap their rod.

Thanks for playing ... you're a real sport. :laugh:

Where do you et 40 seconds????

The video is less that 2 seconds? And you are telling us that he was trained, and he reloaded 6 times and was only shooting for 5 minutes??

You are reaching for straws and making up lies to support you false position?

OH! AND BY THE WAY, WHY NO OUTRAGE AT OBAMA AND HOLDER NOT PROSICUTIONG GUN CRIMES? STILL WAITING????????????

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:07 PM
This is fun, you guys can defend Unicorns :biglaugh:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:07 PM
This is fun, you guys can defend Unicorns :biglaugh:

hOW COME oBAMA AND hOLDER WILL NOT PROSICUTE FEDERAL GUN CRIMES?????

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:07 PM
Count 1 to 40 ... and I bet even your Butt Buddies can get out of a room in less than 40 seconds.

:biglaugh: that's if you don't turn too fast snap their rod.

Thanks for playing ... you're a real sport. :laugh:

It's 4 seconds per reload 10 times dufus

How far can you move in 4 seconds.

Damn Cigar are you really that dense ??

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:09 PM
Where do you et 40 seconds????

The video is less that 2 seconds? And you are telling us that he was trained, and he reloaded 6 times and was only shooting for 5 minutes??

You are reaching for straws and making up lies to support you false position?

OH! AND BY THE WAY, WHY NO OUTRAGE AT OBAMA AND HOLDER NOT PROSICUTIONG GUN CRIMES? STILL WAITING????????????

Make it real fun and stand on one foot and Whistle Dixie :tongue:

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:13 PM
In the time it took him to reload in one of the classrooms, 11 children were able to escape. If those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, how many more of those children would be alive today? 40 seconds is a long time.

This is a no-brainer, and it's only a matter of time before this passes.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:16 PM
In the time it took him to reload in one of the classrooms, 11 children were able to escape. If those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, how many more of those children would be alive today? 40 seconds is a long time.

This is a no-brainer, and it's only a matter of time before this passes.

I bet they deny it's even possible for 11 children to escape a class room in the time it takes to reload.

Because we all know Adam was at the top of his class in reloading ... :smiley_ROFLMAO:

Mister D
04-09-2013, 12:17 PM
I bet they deny it's even possible for 11 children to escape a class room in the time it takes to reload.

Because we all know Adam was at the top of his class in reloading ... :smiley_ROFLMAO:

Dude, it's a rifle. It's not hard. :smiley_ROFLMAO:

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:20 PM
In the time it took him to reload in one of the classrooms, 11 children were able to escape. If those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, how many more of those children would be alive today? 40 seconds is a long time.

This is a no-brainer, and it's only a matter of time before this passes.

Wasn't a reload, it was a gun jam.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:21 PM
Dude, it's a rifle. It's not hard.:roflmao:



We don't need to hear about your Manless problems ... :roflmao:

Mister D
04-09-2013, 12:22 PM
We don't need to hear about your Manless problems ... :roflmao:

What?

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:22 PM
I bet they deny it's even possible for 11 children to escape a class room in the time it takes to reload.

Because we all know Adam was at the top of his class in reloading ... :smiley_ROFLMAO:

4 seconds kid !!

How far can you run ??

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:24 PM
What?

Cigar is desperately trying to change the topic.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:24 PM
In the time it took him to reload in one of the classrooms, 11 children were able to escape. If those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, how many more of those children would be alive today? 40 seconds is a long time.

This is a no-brainer, and it's only a matter of time before this passes.

Well your President has given up on this one!

But if it does pass there are only 330 million of the high capacity mags currently in that hands of citizerns

OH! and maybe you can help Cig he can't see to tell me why it is OK for Obama to be soft on gun prosicutions!

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:24 PM
Wasn't a reload, it was a gun jam.

I put mine on toast...

However, that's great, 15x more possible with the 10 round mag. You're making my point.

bladimz
04-09-2013, 12:28 PM
There's just a tad bit of difference between some highly-trained shooter at a range in a controlled situation changing out clips and some brain-buzzing wacko firing off in a rage in a all-hell-breaks-loose setting. That's why these videos are worthless...

Newtown happened. We'll never know if background checks, etc. would have made any difference. Maybe; maybe not. Does that mean that we shouldn't respond with some common-sense legislation that could make a difference? Why not a federal background check program? It won't hurt, and it just might make a difference. So what's to fear?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Well your President has given up on this one!

But if it does pass there are only 330 million of the high capacity mags currently in that hands of citizerns

OH! and maybe you can help Cig he can't see to tell me why it is OK for Obama to be soft on gun prosicutions!


You may want to try linking us up .. sport. :laugh:
http://brewers1982.com/files/2011/03/parrott.jpg

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Gun rights groups have singled out President Obama for failing to prosecute gun crimes, but the drop in cases filed actually began a decade ago under the Bush administration.
Analysts said the decade long drop underscores the key ingredient in gun prosecutions — a willingness to make them a priority.

Prosecutions dipped at the beginning of the Clinton administration but by 1998 had begun to rise again, tripling between then and 2004, when the federal government filed more than 11,000 cases. Since then, however, prosecutions have steadily fallen again, dipping below 8,000 prosecutions a year over the last three years.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/4/drop-off-in-gun-prosecutions-began-before-obama/#ixzz2PzKjtCJT

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Wasn't a reload, it was a gun jam.

Which is much more prevalant with high capacity magizines! So those 11 would not have likely had the chance with a low cap mag????????

Oh! and Nic and Cig still waiting on the non prosicution answer??

bladimz
04-09-2013, 12:30 PM
OH! and maybe you can help Cig he can't see to tell me why it is OK for Obama to be soft on gun prosicutions!Zelmo, maybe you should post a link backing your claim?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:31 PM
There's just a tad bit of difference between some highly-trained shooter at a range in a controlled situation changing out clips and some brain-buzzing wacko firing off in a rage in a all-hell-breaks-loose setting. That's why these videos are worthless...

Newtown happened. We'll never know if background checks, etc. would have made any difference. Maybe; maybe not. Does that mean that we shouldn't respond with some common-sense legislation that could make a difference? Why not a federal background check program? It won't hurt, and it just might make a difference. So what's to fear?

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000705531/polls_omg_0531_533749_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:33 PM
Gun rights groups have singled out President Obama for failing to prosecute gun crimes, but the drop in cases filed actually began a decade ago under the Bush administration.
Analysts said the decade long drop underscores the key ingredient in gun prosecutions — a willingness to make them a priority.

Prosecutions dipped at the beginning of the Clinton administration but by 1998 had begun to rise again, tripling between then and 2004, when the federal government filed more than 11,000 cases. Since then, however, prosecutions have steadily fallen again, dipping below 8,000 prosecutions a year over the last three years.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/4/drop-off-in-gun-prosecutions-began-before-obama/#ixzz2PzKjtCJT

Your chart proves my point look at the peak prosicutions under a pro gun president and Now.... Well down 45%

Now all I am saying is don't you think we shoudl be asking the President to prosicute each and every crime????

Oh! and we have to ban knives now as there has been a mass stabbing on a collage campus!

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:34 PM
I put mine on toast...

However, that's great, 15x more possible with the 10 round mag. You're making my point.

You had no point for me to make,

it was a gun jam.

40 seconds is not at all long at 4 second intervals.

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:36 PM
Which is much more prevalant with high capacity magizines! So those 11 would not have likely had the chance with a low cap mag????????

Oh! and Nic and Cig still waiting on the non prosicution answer??

So emotional....

BTW, I'm not a servant of yours so normally I answer what questions I want. But just look up for yours....^

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:37 PM
Zelmo, maybe you should post a link backing your claim?

You mean maybe I should post it again???

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/040213-650124-chicago-dead-last-in-federal-gun-prosecutions.htm

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-pushes-for-gun-control-refuses-to-prosecute-gang-gun-crime-in-chicago/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2969934/posts

The last link is the one that I have posed several times please look at my earlier posts!

bladimz
04-09-2013, 12:38 PM
Your chart proves my point look at the peak prosicutions under a pro gun president and Now.... Well down 45%

Now all I am saying is don't you think we shoudl be asking the President to prosicute each and every crime????

Oh! and we have to ban knives now as there has been a mass stabbing on a collage campus!Ban knives? You mean like how we are pushing to ban all guns?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:38 PM
So emotional....

BTW, I'm not a servant of yours so normally I answer what questions I want. But just look up for yours....^



It's fun reading their justifications

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:39 PM
Your chart proves my point look at the peak prosicutions under a pro gun president and Now.... Well down 45%

Now all I am saying is don't you think we shoudl be asking the President to prosicute each and every crime????

Oh! and we have to ban knives now as there has been a mass stabbing on a collage campus!


Still so much emotion....!!! Read the entire piece and take an aspirin....

...what not going to criticize the source...? That's a new one!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:40 PM
Ban knives? You mean like how we are pushing to ban all guns?


Try getting on a Flight bitching about your constitutional rights a bear arms ...

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:40 PM
So emotional....

BTW, I'm not a servant of yours so normally I answer what questions I want. But just look up for yours....^

I am sorry if you thought I was refering to you as a servant! Nothing could be farther from the truth!

As a matter of fact I highly doubt that you could be of service to anyone! but that is another story! And I did see your attempt, and it proved my point thnaks!

And it still is very low under Obama and Holder?

And they are pretending to be concerned about gun crimes, and if that were true then prosicutions would be at all time highs!

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:42 PM
Still so much emotion....!!! Read the entire piece and take an aspirin....

...what not going to criticize the source...? That's a new one!

Why would I complain it proves my point?

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:42 PM
It's fun reading their justifications

Nobody's justifying anything Cigar;

just wondering why the left is all up in arms to pass gun control legislation that won't stop the Sandy Hooks.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:43 PM
I am sorry if you thought I was refering to you as a servant! Nothing could be farther from the truth!

As a matter of fact I highly doubt that you could be of service to anyone! but that is another story! And I did see your attempt, and it proved my point thnaks!

And it still is very low under Obama and Holder?

And they are pretending to be concerned about gun crimes, and if that were true then prosicutions would be at all time highs!

WTF are you talking about?

Is your State Prosecutor refusing to prosecute criminals?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:44 PM
Nobody's justifying anything Cigar;

just wondering why the left is all up in arms to pass gun control legislation that won't stop the Sandy Hooks.



Because 90% of The United States of America said they wanted to!

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:46 PM
It is interesting that I have posted videos, articles, and backed up my point.

our liberal friends are supporting feel good legislation that will would not have saved one life in AZ, CO or CN

And apparently I am an emotional wreck?

So here are the facts.

It is likely that background check at gun show will be passed into law, and I am OK with that.

limiting mag sizes and assult weapoons are really off the table and the President has admitted that!

Now if we could increase the prosicutions of gun crimes and put real security guards in the schools we might be able to have an effect on these terrible crimes?

But I can't seem to get any support on the prosicution thing!

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:48 PM
Calm down and take a moment to READ the WHOLE article and find out if there is a REASON for fewer prosecutions....

And David Chipman, a former agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), said some of the increase may have been due to a Justice Department program that started in 2001 and targeted gun crimes in localities across the country.

“That kind of commitment put a lot of numbers on the board,” said Mr. Chipman, who works with the gun-control group Mayors Against Illegal Guns. “I think it worked as designed, which is to create a deterrent.”

The ATF, perhaps unfairly, began to receive criticism after the increase that some of their efforts were duplicative, and officials had to re-prioritize, Mr. Chipman said.
“You can’t just prosecute 20,000 cases in one year — there just isn’t that infrastructure,” he said. “Any kind of looking at the numbers and drawing some sort of conclusion that people are doing more or less — you’ve got to get beyond that. Because you could be comparing apples and oranges.”

Gun prosecutions require both cases to be developed by investigators, and charges to be filed by prosecutors.

The TRAC study’s numbers said prosecutors turned down 38 percent of referrals in 2002, while last year they declined 32 percent of referrals.

That puts much of the focus on ATF, the lead agency for developing the cases.
Mr. Hudak said one factor in recent decline could be the fact that ATF has been without a permanent director for six years. In January, Mr. Obama nominated acting agency director B. Todd Jones to become its permanent head, but Mr. Jones is still awaiting Senate confirmation.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/4/drop-off-in-gun-prosecutions-began-before-obama/?page=all

Maybe the repubs in the senate should get off their asses and help out?

Answers your question I think....

bladimz
04-09-2013, 12:49 PM
You mean maybe I should post it again???

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/040213-650124-chicago-dead-last-in-federal-gun-prosecutions.htm

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-pushes-for-gun-control-refuses-to-prosecute-gang-gun-crime-in-chicago/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2969934/posts

The last link is the one that I have posed several times please look at my earlier posts!
This link is a little more comprehensive and gives the bigger picture.
http://goo.gl/dgpjk

Either way, do you not believe that background checks can beneficial to the safety of the general public? If not, why?

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:51 PM
Because 90% of The United States of America said they wanted to!

These are the same patriots that believe in democracy, right?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:51 PM
It is interesting that I have posted videos, articles, and backed up my point.

our liberal friends are supporting feel good legislation that will would not have saved one life in AZ, CO or CN

And apparently I am an emotional wreck?

So here are the facts.

It is likely that background check at gun show will be passed into law, and I am OK with that.

limiting mag sizes and assult weapoons are really off the table and the President has admitted that!

Now if we could increase the prosicutions of gun crimes and put real security guards in the schools we might be able to have an effect on these terrible crimes?

But I can't seem to get any support on the prosicution thing!


Is your State Prosecutor NOT Prosecuting Gun Crimes?

Or do you have a particular Federal Crime you're trying to get some traction on?

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:52 PM
The poll that CIG is quoting is that 90% of the people want something done that is including those that favor armed guards and teachers.

Background checks are the only other thing that has more than 50% support!

And the problem that I ahve is this? If the President is lying about the statistics, as seen in the link below, what else is he lying about?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/03/obama-criticized-for-using-dated-disputed-gun-stat-to-sell-background-checks/

hanger4
04-09-2013, 12:53 PM
Because 90% of The United States of America said they wanted to!

That's universal background checks,

which wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook,

the guns were stolen.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:54 PM
Is your State Prosecutor NOT Prosecuting Gun Crimes?

Or do you have a particular Federal Crime you're trying to get some traction on?

First Chicago is at an all time low! So it is yoru state that has the issue

But if they prosicute a person on a federal firearm charge the person gets and additional 5 years, and of course a felony on their record so they are not able to legally buy a firearm!

Also the time can't be serves consecutively so it is an additional 5 years! The law is already on the books, Obama just does not seem to care?

nic34
04-09-2013, 12:57 PM
When all of the “yes” and “probably was” answers were added together, 35.7 percent of those asked said they did not receive a gun from a licensed firearms dealer. If you round the number up, it becomes 40 percent but because the sample size is so small, rounding the number down to 30 percent could also be accurate, the paper noted.

Nit picking..... 1% is too many

Cigar
04-09-2013, 12:58 PM
First Chicago is at an all time low! So it is yoru state that has the issue

But if they prosicute a person on a federal firearm charge the person gets and additional 5 years, and of course a felony on their record so they are not able to legally buy a firearm!

Also the time can't be serves consecutively so it is an additional 5 years! The law is already on the books, Obama just does not seem to care?

I have zero control over what goes on in a City I don't live in ...

But I can a sure you, everyone in my town and county gets prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The last I checked, Presidents don't Prosecute anyone.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 12:59 PM
This link is a little more comprehensive and gives the bigger picture.
http://goo.gl/dgpjk

Either way, do you not believe that background checks can beneficial to the safety of the general public? If not, why?

I happen ot live in a state that already requires that gun show use background checks and that you keep records of private gun sales!

So in MI it will not change anything!

As a national law it would create the felony firearm charge, which if the feds would prosicute, (which they are not at the present time) it would add to the time criminals are put in prison!

The percentage of guns that are bought legally being used in crimes is very small and in the case of AZ and W VA the shootings whre the shooter did buy the gun legally, nothing in this new legislations would ahve prevented that sale!

I think that you can make the case that it would have a very small effect! less than 1% but it is not really that much of a hassel so why not!

AS far as assult weapons and mag size, totally worthless!

nic34
04-09-2013, 01:00 PM
That's universal background checks,

which wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook,

the guns were stolen.

No, they were legally owned and were easy to trace back to the owner. (The mother) Just how it's supposed to work.

Try a different "slant".

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:03 PM
I have zero control over what goes on in a City I don't live in ...

But I can a sure you, everyone in my town and county gets prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The last I checked, Presidents don't Prosecute anyone.

The fullest extent of the law would include a felony firearms charge! And that would be the job of the Attn General of the USA who reports directly to the top law enforcement officer in the USA, the President of the United States!

This is the problem that I have. with the president attn General Holder, and people like you???

why are you not upset by the lack of prosicutions, this would keep these violent offenders in jail 5 years longer! but you seem to want to just let it slade?

And that is why I think that there is no credibility in the Presidnt argument!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:04 PM
No, they were legally owned and were easy to trace back to the owner. (The mother) Just how it's supposed to work.

Try a different "slant".

Wow ... they don't even have the facts to their own arguments ... :rollseyes:

hanger4
04-09-2013, 01:05 PM
No, they were legally owned and were easy to trace back to the owner. (The mother) Just how it's supposed to work.

Try a different "slant".

Adam Lanza STOLE the weapons dufus,

The background checks universal or not wouldn't have stopped him.

Damn nic Adam L murdered his mother to steal them. :slap:

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:05 PM
The fullest extent of the law would include a felony firearms charge! And that would be the job of the Attn General of the USA who reports directly to the top law enforcement officer in the USA, the President of the United States!

This is the problem that I have. with the president attn General Holder, and people like you???

why are you not upset by the lack of prosicutions, this would keep these violent offenders in jail 5 years longer! but you seem to want to just let it slade?

And that is why I think that there is no credibility in the Presidnt argument!

Then bring it up for a Vote ... WhaDaYa afraid of? Democracy?

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:06 PM
Adam Lanza STOLE the weapons dufus,

The background checks universal or not wouldn't have stopped him.

Damn nic Adam L murdered his mother to steal them. :slap:



Oh God :dang:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:07 PM
No, they were legally owned and were easy to trace back to the owner. (The mother) Just how it's supposed to work.

Try a different "slant".

OK so because they were legally, and we could trace them, That makes the deaths of the children OK? Got it!

How about we enfoce the law and arm people in the schools and hope to save the life of these children

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:07 PM
Oh God :dang:

You'll get it eventually. :wink:

jillian
04-09-2013, 01:08 PM
What ?? in the Presidents proposals on gun control

would have averted Sandy Hook ??

magazines holding fewer rounds would have slowed the carnage and maybe averted some of it.

and perhaps rational background checks would have kept guns out of the guy's house.

but why be rational when you can repeat NRA propaganda?

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:09 PM
Then bring it up for a Vote ... WhaDaYa afraid of? Democracy?

And Reid has already said that he wild not bring the Assualt wepons and mag restriction to a vote because even he know that there is more democratic opposition than support!

If it is a clean bill the background checks should pass , and I am OK with that? but what good will it do if they refuse to prosicute the crimes??

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:09 PM
magazines holding fewer rounds would have slowed the carnage and maybe averted some of it.

and perhaps rational background checks would have kept guns out of the guy's house.

but why be rational when you can repeat NRA propaganda?

You are clearly unfamiliar with firearms.

hanger4
04-09-2013, 01:09 PM
Wow ... they don't even have the facts to their own arguments ... :rollseyes:


Connecticut Shooter Adam Lanza's Guns Were Registered To Mother Nancy Lanza: Official


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/connecticut-shooter-guns_n_2306913.html

WTH do you know about facts ??

nic34
04-09-2013, 01:10 PM
OK so because they were legally, and we could trace them, That makes the deaths of the children OK? Got it!

How about we enfoce the law and arm people in the schools and hope to save the life of these children

You really are off the rails today zel.....

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:13 PM
magazines holding fewer rounds would have slowed the carnage and maybe averted some of it.

and perhaps rational background checks would have kept guns out of the guy's house.

but why be rational when you can repeat NRA propaganda?

OK the mag changes could have possibly saved one life, using the time of the change, however it is likely that the gun would not have gammed which took him over 11 seconds to clean, and that would have possible caused more dealths?

Next there were no mental illnes complaints agisnt the son or the mother? The guns were bought legally and through the background checks were preformed? So please share how you think the checks would have prevented this crime?

And last the only people that have brought up the NRA in this thread is those on the left!

jillian
04-09-2013, 01:14 PM
You are clearly unfamiliar with firearms.

you keep repeating that nonsense. clearly you don't know nearly as much as you pretend to.

you remind me of a late uncle of mine. smart guy... fancied himself an intellect... just never did anything withhis life and was dissatisfied.

but i bet spewing nonsense and being a petty little know-it-all makes you feel better about yourself like it did him.... he should rest in peace.

nic34
04-09-2013, 01:16 PM
you keep repeating that nonsense. clearly you don't know nearly as much as you pretend to.

you remind me of a late uncle of mine. smart guy... fancied himself an intellect... just never did anything withhis life and was dissatisfied.

but i bet spewing nonsense and being a petty little know-it-all makes you feel better about yourself like it did him.... he should rest in peace.

Oh, oh, you're on to him.....:shocked:

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:16 PM
you keep repeating that nonsense. clearly you don't know nearly as much as you pretend to.

you remind me of a late uncle of mine. smart guy... fancied himself an intellect... just never did anything withhis life and was dissatisfied.

but i bet spewing nonsense and being a petty little know-it-all makes you feel better about yourself like it did him.

If you were familiar with firearms you would understand how easily such a weapon is reloaded. It's not like stopping to change your pants. A practiced shooter (Lanza was that and more) could execute the magazine change with remarkable (to you, that is) efficiency. None of the proposed regulations would have changed anything.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:16 PM
You really are off the rails today zel.....



I suppose he's looking for theft charges ... :grin: for eating food that was in the house.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:17 PM
you keep repeating that nonsense. clearly you don't know nearly as much as you pretend to.

you remind me of a late uncle of mine. smart guy... fancied himself an intellect... just never did anything withhis life and was dissatisfied.

but i bet spewing nonsense and being a petty little know-it-all makes you feel better about yourself like it did him.... he should rest in peace.

OK I am a certified firearms trainer and I think that the mag changes would have likely gave the shooter time to reset his stance and sight picture and there likely would not have been a malfunction, causing even more death!

So it is clear to me and my opnion that you know very little about firearms!

does that help!

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:17 PM
Oh, oh, you're on to him.....:shocked:

You let women fight your battles now, Geronimo? :laugh:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:19 PM
You really are off the rails today zel.....

explain please?

My goodness enforcing the law and providing safty???? What a radical thought???

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:21 PM
OK I am a certified firearms trainer and I think that the mag changes would have likely gave the shooter time to reset his stance and sight picture and there likely would not have been a malfunction, causing even more death!

So it is clear to me and my opnion that you know very little about firearms!

does that help!

Please spare us ... :rollseyes:

http://www.brandchannel.com/images/FeaturesProfile/profile_img1_underoos.jpg

Peter1469
04-09-2013, 01:23 PM
Lanza expended 154 rounds in five minutes. He reloaded six times.

If he had only ten round magazines he would have had to carry 15 additional magazines

instead of the nine he carried in order to expend the same number of rounds.

Allowing four seconds per reload (and that's generous) Lanza would have needed an additional 40 seconds at most

to do what he did, probably less, since half of the magazines weren't empty.


Banning high capacity magazines won't solve a thing.

If it takes you 4 seconds to reload a clip, you need more classes.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:25 PM
If it takes you 4 seconds to reload a clip, you need more classes.

It takes me about 4-5 seconds and I'm not used to reloading. I must do it a few times a year. Someone practicing for a massacre...

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:26 PM
If it takes you 4 seconds to reload a clip, you need more classes.



Hey Pete, do you think you have a chance to run out of a room while a someone (non-God of All Guns) reloads?

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:27 PM
Hey Pete, do you think you have a chance to run out of a room while a someone (non-God of All Guns) reloads?

Some of you make it sound like you'd be crying in the corner hoping the police show up in time.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:28 PM
Hey Pete, do you think you have a chance to run out of a room while a someone (non-God of All Guns) reloads?

Cigar, it's a rifle. The shooter isn't changing his pants.

hanger4
04-09-2013, 01:29 PM
If it takes you 4 seconds to reload a clip, you need more classes.

True dat.

Twas just a time on the high side to show 4 seconds ain't enough time to do squat.

bladimz
04-09-2013, 01:31 PM
How about we enfoce the law and arm people in the schools and hope to save the life of these childrenIs this something that you endorse only because LaPierre spilled that from his pie-hole? Do you really believe that's a viable, realistic answer?

Armed guards at schools... and then armed guards at school and community sporting events... and then armed guards at public events like parades and Easter Egg hunts... and then armed guards at churches, supermarkets, and day care centers. Give guns to teachers, football, baseball, basketball, hockey and tennis coaches and their staff. Arm the preachers, the check-out girls, the baggers, the day-care staff members. Give them all guns and train them. Give them all AR-15's with 30 round magazines. Do you see what door you're opening here?

How many guards at school? What would determine the number? Would you use some kind of guard-to-student ratio thing?

Like i said there is no reason to look back and say that new legislation would never have saved those kids at Sandy Hook. That story is history. There needs to be a lesson learned from this event. If we can't agree on the simple concept of Universal Background checks, we are lost.

hanger4
04-09-2013, 01:31 PM
Hey Pete, do you think you have a chance to run out of a room while a someone (non-God of All Guns) reloads?

4 seconds Cigar

You can answer your own question.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:33 PM
Is this something that you endorse only because LaPierre spilled that from his pie-hole? Do you really believe that's a viable, realistic answer?

Armed guards at schools... and then armed guards at school and community sporting events... and then armed guards at public events like parades and Easter Egg hunts... and then armed guards at churches, supermarkets, and day care centers. Give guns to teachers, football, baseball, basketball, hockey and tennis coaches and their staff. Arm the preachers, the check-out girls, the baggers, the day-care staff members. Give them all guns and train them. Give them all AR-15's with 30 round magazines. Do you see what door you're opening here?

How many guards at school? What would determine the number? Would you use some kind of guard-to-student ratio thing?

Like i said there is no reason to look back and say that new legislation would never have saved those kids at Sandy Hook. That story is history. There needs to be a lesson learned from this event. If we can't agree on the simple concept of Universal Background checks, we are lost.


Conservatives don't even what to pay teachers, cops and firemen, so why would the pay security guards?

jillian
04-09-2013, 01:35 PM
OK I am a certified firearms trainer and I think that the mag changes would have likely gave the shooter time to reset his stance and sight picture and there likely would not have been a malfunction, causing even more death!

So it is clear to me and my opnion that you know very little about firearms!

does that help!

not really. because the people in my life who actually do know a lot about guns don't agree with you.

which tells me it's a function of one's opinion....

and i trust theirs. it doesn't take a genius to know that you can stop someone as they're re-loading.

the whole checking their stance thing when they reload is a bit wishful thinking, imo.

nic34
04-09-2013, 01:36 PM
You let women fight your battles now, Geronimo? :laugh:

You must be new to the discussion... or that's just another ignorant remark...

jillian
04-09-2013, 01:38 PM
You let women fight your battles now, Geronimo? :laugh:

so you're not just a racist who calls black people negro and talks about "feral blacks", you're also sexually insecure and a sexist.

cool.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:38 PM
You must be new to the discussion... or that's just another ignorant remark...

Why was it ignorant? If you choose to ignore than do so. You look ridiculous taking potshots from under some old lady's skirt.

Peter1469
04-09-2013, 01:40 PM
Hey Pete, do you think you have a chance to run out of a room while a someone (non-God of All Guns) reloads?

It depends on where the shooter is, and the person who wants to run. If you slip past the shooter, you might end up with a bullet in the back of your head.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:40 PM
so you're not just a racist who calls black people negro and talks about "feral blacks", you're also sexually insecure and a sexist.

cool.

Negro is the correct term. Sorry if you don't like but I really couldn't care less. Let Geronimo out from under your skirt. Hey, maybe that's how the West was lost? :grin:

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:41 PM
It depends on where the shooter is, and the person who wants to run. If you slip past the shooter, you might end up with a bullet in the back of your head.

More likely in the face if you hesitate for even a second to move immediately after he stops firing.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:43 PM
so you're not just a racist who calls black people negro and talks about "feral blacks", you're also sexually insecure and a sexist.

cool.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9PujqN8Gl3k/TsqxKAxCXUI/AAAAAAAACRg/erKNAExP1vo/s1600/virtual-high-five.jpg

hanger4
04-09-2013, 01:49 PM
Conservatives don't even what to pay teachers, cops and firemen, so why would the pay security guards?

:rollseyes:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 01:52 PM
Please spare us ... :rollseyes:

http://www.brandchannel.com/images/FeaturesProfile/profile_img1_underoos.jpg

nic34
04-09-2013, 01:52 PM
Negro is the correct term. Sorry if you don't like but I really couldn't care less. Let Geronimo out from under your skirt. Hey, maybe that's how the West was lost? :grin:

Yeah, they kicked their white-eye's asses.

Since you've taken up as the resident gun expert, I'll give you time to go back and get caught up on earlier posts... might keep you from looking even more foolish....du penner...

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:56 PM
Yeah, they kicked their white-eye's asses.

Since you've taken up as the resident gun expert, I'll give you time to go back and get caught up on earlier posts... might keep you from looking even more foolish....du penner...

Their what?

Have I? For example, if you say guns don't fire bullets and I say they do am I now the "resident gun expert"? No, chief, the problem is that far too many of you not only insist on pontificating on matters you are not familiar with but you also have an attitude about it. Nic, you often don;t have a clue. If you are going to take it personally it's probably best for you to stick with topics you understand.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 01:58 PM
Yeah, they kicked their white-eye's asses.

Since you've taken up as the resident gun expert, I'll give you time to go back and get caught up on earlier posts... might keep you from looking even more foolish....du penner...

Don't worry, he'll ask for another ... :laugh:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4631783906347202&pid=1.7&w=207&h=146&c=7&rs=1

Mister D
04-09-2013, 01:59 PM
Don't worry, he'll ask for another ... :laugh:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4631783906347202&pid=1.7&w=207&h=146&c=7&rs=1

Still waiting for the first one but I know how lazy those Injuns are. He probably got at the whiskey. :wink:

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:00 PM
I like juggling liberals. I wish they could be more like libertarians and actually bring something to the game.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:01 PM
Please spare us ... :rollseyes:

http://www.brandchannel.com/images/FeaturesProfile/profile_img1_underoos.jpg

No, No, No You forgot the cape???

jillian
04-09-2013, 02:02 PM
Negro is the correct term. Sorry if you don't like but I really couldn't care less. Let Geronimo out from under your skirt. Hey, maybe that's how the West was lost? :grin:

negro hasn't been the correct term since 1965.

i've decided... you're not very bright.

i suppose you think rudeness makes up for that.

it doesn't.

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:04 PM
negro hasn't been the correct term since 1965.

i've decided... you're not very bright.

i suppose you think rudeness makes up for that.

it doesn't.

That's funny. Your government just dropped it from the census surveys this February!

That's nice.

I just like serving people what they ask for. :smiley:

roadmaster
04-09-2013, 02:07 PM
negro hasn't been the correct term since 1965.

i've decided... you're not very bright.

i suppose you think rudeness makes up for that.

it doesn't.

So they are rude to themselves? Like the United Negro College fund one among many. Are you sure you are bright?

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:09 PM
So they are rude to themselves? Like the United Negro College fund one among many. Are you sure you are bright?

LOL

I guess the US Census Bureau is full of ignorant people too.

simpsonofpg
04-09-2013, 02:11 PM
What ?? in the Presidents proposals on gun control

would have averted Sandy Hook ??

Absolutely nothing. The guns he used were obtained legally and registered. Obama
s law is posturing and that it all.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:14 PM
Is this something that you endorse only because LaPierre spilled that from his pie-hole? Do you really believe that's a viable, realistic answer?

Armed guards at schools... and then armed guards at school and community sporting events... and then armed guards at public events like parades and Easter Egg hunts... and then armed guards at churches, supermarkets, and day care centers. Give guns to teachers, football, baseball, basketball, hockey and tennis coaches and their staff. Arm the preachers, the check-out girls, the baggers, the day-care staff members. Give them all guns and train them. Give them all AR-15's with 30 round magazines. Do you see what door you're opening here?

How many guards at school? What would determine the number? Would you use some kind of guard-to-student ratio thing?

Like i said there is no reason to look back and say that new legislation would never have saved those kids at Sandy Hook. That story is history. There needs to be a lesson learned from this event. If we can't agree on the simple concept of Universal Background checks, we are lost.

NIce ! Of course with my background I would have no reason to have my own opnion on law emforcement. Never in my past line of work did I have the chance to hang out with him!

So now lets look at the BS that you are trying to sell

#1 NJ and CN have univeraso background checks including gun shows and an assualt weapons ban in Conn! So that will change nothing!

#2 I have already told you that I support back ground checks because it could have a very small effect! and that is worth the effort!

#3 Not one of the liberals on this post has an answer for the President and Attn General not enforcing the current laws on the books, there is no! outrage? NONE! this means that you really don't care about the safty issues.

#4 Armed Guards. I don't know about your state but in my state, there are already armed guards at all of the sporting events, in the form of at least 2 officers. There are already armed guards at the enterance of many factories, and at banks, As for the number, how about we let the school district decide that.

For example in TX where they allow teachers to carry if the school board will allow it, they are training hundreds of teachers each quarter that are goiing to carry a gun! So in those schools one armed guard is most liely enough, In chicago where there have been nearly 400 shootings this school year, insoide the schools a platoon might not be enough!

#5 You have NO! answer for the fact that cities with the most restrictive gun control laws have the highest gun crime rates! So with Liberals it is not about the safty of the children of the people, becuse if it was they would not promote laws that have an adverse effect! It is about controling people!

that is what you are spewing out of your pie hole a bunch of restrictions on law abiding citizens that will have very little effect on violent crime!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 02:16 PM
negro hasn't been the correct term since 1965.

i've decided... you're not very bright.

i suppose you think rudeness makes up for that.

it doesn't.


They've had a difficult 4 years and the next 4 isn't going to be a picnic for them either.

So the best thing to do is just smile and shake the rattle in front of them until it's time for their next diaper change.

http://www.youjustmademylist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/cry_baby.jpg

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:17 PM
They've had a difficult 4 years and the next 4 isn't going to be a picnic for them either.

So the best thing to do is just smile and shake the rattle in front of them until it's time for their next diaper change.

http://www.youjustmademylist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/cry_baby.jpg

Who are they?

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:20 PM
Conservatives don't even what to pay teachers, cops and firemen, so why would the pay security guards?

Hold the phone liberal boy?

conservativea are all for paying police and teachers and first responders. that 92 billion we are wasting on subsdising Green energy companies that are going out of business anyway would hire a lot of police officers.

Now liberals like you and Obama and Holder don't what to enforce gun laws, becasue then the crime rates would go down and that would not be good for your agenda on restricting firearms to law abiding citizens.

Also these new tax rates will likely lower the revenue to the federal govnermnt as it will keep growth at a crawl!


just imagine what you could do with the 3 million dollars that is used to fund the cowboy poetry festival in NV each year?

Of now that everyone will have health insurance, the 392 million that is given to planed parenthood each year. that is a lot of officers?

And if we could give the companies back the money being taken from themin taxes they could hire a lot of people and that owuld reduce the unemployment payouts and give the government even more money!

So it is liberals that don't want police on the streets. not conservatives.

Cigar
04-09-2013, 02:23 PM
Who are they?

You can put your hand down now.

http://mrsohtech.webs.com/raised%20hand.gif

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:25 PM
You can put your hand down now.

http://mrsohtech.webs.com/raised hand.gif

What?

So you don't know. Understood.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:26 PM
not really. because the people in my life who actually do know a lot about guns don't agree with you.

which tells me it's a function of one's opinion....

and i trust theirs. it doesn't take a genius to know that you can stop someone as they're re-loading.

the whole checking their stance thing when they reload is a bit wishful thinking, imo.

Well I tell you what I will load up a bunch of wax bullets which will not kill your loved ones but the hurt like hell, and I will keep shooting them until they can dis arm me? Now keep in mind that these bullets are likely going to take them off their feet and they will have about 1.5second each and every time I reload!

I will stop shooting after I have changed clips 20 times. And if they can disarm me during a mag change, I will give them 1000 dollars

By the way I have posted videos of mag changes, and you tell me how you are going to get the gun out of his hands. you are not going to be stand next to a shooter.

SO IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPNION, YOU AND YOUR FAMILY MEMBER SHOULD NOT BE ALLOW TO OWN AND GUN YOU ARE DANGEROUS

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:28 PM
not really. because the people in my life who actually do know a lot about guns don't agree with you.

which tells me it's a function of one's opinion....

and i trust theirs. it doesn't take a genius to know that you can stop someone as they're re-loading.

the whole checking their stance thing when they reload is a bit wishful thinking, imo.

By the way to the others on here???? This is the liberal mind set.

They have no answer only wishful thinking!

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:29 PM
By the way to the others on here???? This is the liberal mind set.

They have no answer only wishful thinking!

It's all emotion. They feel compelled to do something even if that something won't impact the problem.

jillian
04-09-2013, 02:29 PM
By the way to the others on here???? This is the liberal mind set.

They have no answer only wishful thinking!

stop projecting.

nic34
04-09-2013, 02:31 PM
So you and Meester D really are the ex-perts around these parts.....

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:35 PM
So you and Meester D really are the ex-perts around these parts.....

Still waiting, Geronimo. Let me know when you sober up. :wink:

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:35 PM
On firearms and firearms training I would consider myself an expert. I would defer to peter if I have said anything that is wrong, as he has more experence in the field and may have run acroos situations that I have not!

but certainly would not consider anything that you have to offer as relivant unless you can back it up, and that you have not even tireid!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 02:44 PM
It's all emotion. They feel compelled to do something even if that something won't impact the problem.

Well let’s see … when the Majority of the North America is mandating that their President DO Something … what is the President supposed to do, cowarded down like he’s a Republican?

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:47 PM
Well let’s see … when the Majority of the North America is mandating that their President DO Something … what is the President supposed to do, cowarded down like he’s a Republican?.

Apparently, that majority hasn't made much impression on Democrats. In any case, if he must do somethin ghe should address the problem. Right now, he's not.

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 02:53 PM
Well let’s see … when the Majority of the North America is mandating that their President DO Something … what is the President supposed to do, cowarded down like he’s a Republican?

Really not acording ot the recent polls it appears that he is over reaching once again?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/poll-most-americans-disapprove-of-obama-on-guns/

And I would not expect him to cower,, he saves that for the muslim extremist! He will apoligize to them all day long!

Cigar
04-09-2013, 02:55 PM
Really not acording ot the recent polls it appears that he is over reaching once again?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/poll-most-americans-disapprove-of-obama-on-guns/

And I would not expect him to cower,, he saves that for the muslim extremist! He will apoligize to them all day long!



Then it's settled ... why can't they simply VOTE on it and let Democracy Work ?

Mister D
04-09-2013, 02:55 PM
Then it's settled ... why can't they simply VOTE on it and let Democracy Work ?

Why are Democrats afraid?

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 03:01 PM
Then it's settled ... why can't they simply VOTE on it and let Democracy Work ?

Well I think that they will but they want to see the bill first, instead of passing it and then letting the lying libs write it!

I can see no reason why if it is a clean bill that universal background checks will not pass. that to me seems to be something that could have a very small effect! and even if it is small that should be done!

The assult weapons and mags Harry is not going to bring that up, He is not going to put his fellow Dems in a place that they have to vote against it!

nic34
04-09-2013, 03:06 PM
Being a firearms expert is all fine and good, but we still live in a civilized country, and people in this country are free to pass laws where safety of all is concerned. Most people including gun owners believe background checks and 10 rd. mags. are reasonable laws.

You can be a part of what laws are passed and what is inforced, or you can just sit on the sidelines like meester D and just give up because you think nothing works.

Maybe you want to take the chance and abolish the laws on the books that are inforced? What do you think keeps this country from becoming like Syria or Afghanistan?

Mister D
04-09-2013, 03:08 PM
You can be a part of what laws are passed and what is inforced, or you can just sit on the sidelines like meester D and just give up because you think nothing works.



When have I ever suggested such a thing? Never?

zelmo1234
04-09-2013, 03:12 PM
Being a firearms expert is all fine and good, but we still live in a civilized country, and people in this country are free to pass laws where safety of all is concerned. Most people including gun owners believe background checks and 10 rd. mags. are reasonable laws.

You can be a part of what laws are passed and what is inforced, or you can just sit on the sidelines like meester D and just give up because you think nothing works.

Maybe you want to take the chance and abolish the laws on the books that are inforced? What do you think keeps this country from becoming like Syria or Afghanistan?

On the background checks, I think as long as it is not a registry? Then it will have a very small positive effect and the public supprt is there for this, and I am not going to oppose it!

Teh assualt weapons ban, is DOA and I think that everyone know this. And as for Mags, their is actually not 50% support for this, but it is close. but there are hundread of millions of these on the market, and there are acutally millions more of them on order! So the effect of this is zero onad a waste, but if that is what the people want, if it makes them sleep at night! OK I have plenty and if someone wants one it iwill be available for more than 100 years. But it is likely that they are goiig to try and tie the mags with the background check and that will nver pass.