We keep reading in the MSM that the Administration wants to have another go at it. The new astroturf groups like Moms Demand Action are blasting social media. Mayor Bloomberg (AKA The Malevolent Dwarf) just launched his new Yankee Vulture Bus Tour to travel incognito around the country. And the usual suspects still are trying to make noise about the Santa Monica and yet they are not getting a whole lot of traction about it.
Other than a few faithful, the major players in positions of power know any new attempts at gun control are a losing proposition. But what they know (or think they know) is that Gun Control is a highly divisive discussion and they need that right now as the administration has been taking it in the chin and other softer parts lately with the slew of scandals that scare people on both sides of the aisle. The administration also needs to give something that MSM can write/talk about other than the IRS and the NSA and the EPA and State Department and the FBI and etc.
So basically be ready to be part of the Socket Puppet Theater. And don’t dismiss the SOBs because they are still trying at state level and even local levels without any regard for accuracy or even the truth.
And if anybody asks why you don’t support the “Universal Background Checks” just tell them that If Nobody Can’t Trust Them With Phones, Sure As Hell I Won’t Trust Them With My Guns.
Because you know, I am sure this administration is following the law not keeping records of the NICS background checks, right?
I am sure this administration is following the law not keeping records of the NICS background checks, right?
The law sez that those records must be destroyed within 24 hours. I wonder what the law sez about copies of those records being destroyed. Loopholes, man, we need to close the loopholes.
Face it: we’re going to lose universal background checks at some point. They make way too much sense and the only people who oppose them are the hardcore pro-gun…and there just aren’t enough of us.
Trying to tie it to another political issue isn’t going to work because, for most people, it transcends politics.
We need to be cautious and stop demonizing these people otherwise we’re going to be the only ones to blame when the BS passes.
So you agree that eventually we will lose possession of weapons with certain characteristics like a pistol grip or a flash suppressor or magazines with more than 10 rounds and that we just should treat them nicely and not demonize them because they may rape us with more care?
In January there was 100% certainty that UBC and banning “assault weapons” was a sure thing. Six months later we are still here.
Last year there was 100% certainty that Stand Your Ground was going to be reversed in Florida and Duty to Retreat would be imposed. Now there is a good chance that Zimmerman will be found Not Guilty of 2nd degree murder.
Appeasing the wolf just makes it hungrier.
UK? I live in South Carolina, ace. Never been across the pond.
I’m a lifelong Republican, been a card carrying member of the NRA for 30 years and let me tell YOU something. You and your yahoo Tea Party patriots need to dial it back a notch. You’re making us look like intransigent dipshits out here and many of us are getting tired of it. I like to hunt and I love to pop some rounds at a target or two every now and then and I don’t need flash suppressors or high capacity magazines to do it. And when Bubba comes walking through the door uninvited, I can take care of him, too.
Quit making fools of us all. This isn’t a political movement and it isn’t a pissing contest. It’s about protecting ourselves and our families.
And today you trace out of Sweden!
I wonder where Troll George is actually from. Last I heard, they don’t grow castrati in SC.
“Lifelong republican, card-carrying NRA member for 30 years, we need to ban guns.”
False flag much? You probably hope the Republicans will put more “progressive” candidates out there in future elections.
You like Moby’s music, or just his politics?
“We need to be cautious and stop demonizing these people…”?? Excuse me, but fuck you. They have been demonizing us for years while we, “be cautious.” Being cautious got us the 1994 AWB. It damn near got us a lot more onerous, useless crap. Universal background checks will solve nothing but will be a great way to form a national registry. We need to stop “compromising.” Not one more inch.
Tell me, George, have you ever used the phrase, “I’m a gun owner, but….” or “I fully support the Second Amendment, but….”? Bet ya have.
George, what are you doing in the UK anyway?
Whoopsie. Miguel, you’re amazing.
That explains a thing or two.
Bloomberg is the prime player in all this. He’s the one driving the issue, not the White House or Congress.
I keep thinking that the way Bloomy keeps getting red in the face, he will stroke out. In the words of MLK, I have a dream, a dream of a world without the mad dwarf trying to take my rights.
“If I enrage my opponent and he dies of a stroke or heart attack, I claim moral victory.”
-me
I keep telling people, if 80% of the people supported background checks, they would have passed. We have to keep writing and calling our Reps and Senators and make sure they understand where we stand on the issue. I have never said “I am a gun owner but” or “I support the 2nd Amendment but”. There are no “buts” When we start that, we lose.
How about from the other direction.
I believe that guns need to be kept out of the hands of some criminals, but universal background checks are entirely unenforceable, will do nothing to stop criminals from getting guns, and will vastly expand existing black markets while at the same time making it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns legally, causing people to become criminals who otherwise would not be, and increasing already excessive government spending even more.
Background checks will cause people to die. A woman with a dangerous ex-boyfriend can decide a gun would be a good way to protect herself from him. She may get killed waiting for the paperwork to go through. It’s happened before.
Honestly, I have a problem with the bans on possession by those with past criminal convictions; It’s a relic of the prohibition era enacted specifically to give the state “justification” to harass bootleggers.
Correction: suspected bootleggers.
“some.” Individuals who are clearly violent and/or repeat offenders should probably be restricted. On the other hand, those individuals should probably be locked up in prison or executed anyway.
I haven’t really put any thought into it until just now, but probably someone with past convictions(such as assault and substance abuse… the only cases where I could justify restricting ownership) should be able to regain their rights with good behavior(5-10 years, let’s say? So Robert Downey Jr. should be off the restricted lists by now).
People change.
I support restitution for felons that paid full sentence and restitution for Non-Violent offenses and do not have a history of violence. Time period shouldn’t be more than 3 years IMHO.
Admittedly I hadn’t really put much thought into it, and I don’t know enough about psychology and sociology to give a good suggestion. 5 and 10 years are nice round numbers.
But yes, I do support violent felons having their right to bear arms *TEMPORARILY suspended* pending good behavior. But it should be of an “innocent until proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” not “Oh, we think you might make people feel unsafe.”
Only evil people benefit when average citizens are disarmed.
Your title: Another Gun Contol Push coming, but why? Why? Because they’re malevolent control freaks who want complete power over every person in the country.
Why? Because if they think they can get away with it, they’ll keep trying.