carlfense Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Tell that to any special interest groups on either side. I agree to your point but that isn't how it works in Washington. That doesn't mean that you have to pick one extremist side or the other. Without you and your dollars . . . how much influence do you think that they would have? Link to comment
lo country Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 The reason the NRA exists. To counter crap like this. There is no reasonableness in DC. http://www.foxnews.c...e-in-attack-ad/ 1. You don't need the NRA to counter stuff like that . . . you just need to expose the editing. I'd be willing to wager that this Fox News expose has had far more viewers than the original ad. No NRA needed. 2. Extremism and craziness is most effectively countered with rational thought and moderation. (Might be why Obama is winning these battles of late...) When people (presumably voters) start believing that they need to be crazier because someone or something that they oppose is crazy . . . well . . . we're in a bad place. Let me ask you an honest question. Do you consider Obama a moderate as it relates to gun control? I have no issue with some of his 23 points. I wonder about the funding and have some concerns about the mental health issues as it relates to HIPPA (?) and will this discourage people from getting help (particularly LEO and MIL) with possible PTSD so as to not lose the ability to purchase a firearm or possibly lose their jobs. I think that his goal is simply not to control or mitigate the violence, but to actually ban hi-cap mags and certain class of firearms. This, IMO, is the extreme side of the coin. Had he not played to his extreme base, I think he would have much more support. Some of the initial plans will have the intended results, and make it more difficult to purchase and or acquire firearms. BUT nothing on that list would have prevented the tragedy at Newtown save armed LEO's at the school. (something missing from the 2011 and 2012 budget, unsure who made the cuts) He murdered his mother and stole her firearms. IIRC, he had actually been denied the right to purchase a firearm. Also the whole 40% of gun sales comment was out of context as it is actually "40% of all re-sales" not 40% of all sales.......... Again, I support back ground checks, sharing data base info, funding police and placing them in schools. I even support yearly renewal of permits. requiring a "safe" to secure your firearms so that they can not be stolen and subsequently used. I do not support any way shape or form the banning of a class of firearms or magazines. I think I have a more "moderate" view of management of the issue and do not consider it to be extreme. Here is a lengthy article showing some good statistics ref firearms. http://factcheck.org...c-vs-gun-facts/ I agree with your last comment for sure. Sadly, it also goes for politicians having to be crazier as well. Politics, IMO, has almost become like a rabid fan base. No middle ground. My team or bust. Screw your team etc......... It is almost as though the state of politics today has taken on the tone of the Cold War. With dems and reps playing the role of the US and USSR where the only losers are the American people. I do not remember, in my lifetime, a more divisive climate in DC. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Tell that to any special interest groups on either side. I agree to your point but that isn't how it works in Washington. That doesn't mean that you have to pick one extremist side or the other. Without you and your dollars . . . how much influence do you think that they would have? I said that I have never supported them and have never been a member. I have never sent them any money. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 It is kind of ironic that one side is just absolutely appalled that criminals can get guns easily and they are the same ones that just handed over thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels so they can kill Americans. I wonder if they did back ground checks on them. 2 Link to comment
beanman Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Always a classic: Didn't watch the whole thing because nothing will ever compare to the Virginia Tech game video. But did see this link when I stopped the video. 1 Link to comment
Junior Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 http://mobile.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/20/five_injured_in_accidental_gun_show_shootings_on_gun_appreciation_day.html?original_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FjKfYmOUw This is what we call "irony". Link to comment
rawhide Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 It's called moronic. Accidental or not. I discharged a 30-06 right between my feet "accidentally" when I was 17 while out deer hunting north of Atkinson. Missed both feet by about 2 inches and left a crater. Stupidity on my part for not asking how to operate a borrowed deer rifle. 2 inches either way woulda got me outa the draft . Woulda put a definite hitch in my git-a-long. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It's called moronic. Accidental or not. I discharged a 30-06 right between my feet "accidentally" when I was 17 while out deer hunting north of Atkinson. Missed both feet by about 2 inches and left a crater. Stupidity on my part for not asking how to operate a borrowed deer rifle. 2 inches either way woulda got me outa the draft . Woulda put a definite hitch in my git-a-long. When I was about 5, my grandpa took me hunting. He dropped a deer at about 250 yards using a Garand w/ iron sights. We walked over to the deer, he showed me the entry wound, which was roughly the size of a quarter. He rolled it over and showed me the exit wound which was about as big as a volleball. He framed the wound with his hands, and then held his hands up to me. He looked at me and said, if this would have hit you, it would have blown you in half. He then said the words that have always stuck in my head, "only point a gun at somebody, if you're going to use it" 1 Link to comment
Junior Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/lone-star-college-shooting_n_2527806.html?utm_hp_ref=college *Sigh* Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Let me ask you an honest question. Do you consider Obama a moderate as it relates to gun control? Given his proposals as POTUS, yes. Absolutely. No handgun bans . . . no more onerous restrictions than those passed over a decade ago . . . etc. We survived the AWB (which I think is ineffective and not worthwhile) with our rights intact. It wasn't the slippery slope that some argued. I have no issue with some of his 23 points. I wonder about the funding and have some concerns about the mental health issues as it relates to HIPPA (?) and will this discourage people from getting help (particularly LEO and MIL) with possible PTSD so as to not lose the ability to purchase a firearm or possibly lose their jobs. Lose their jobs? Eh? Some people with PTSD probably shouldn't own firearms. I think that his goal is simply not to control or mitigate the violence, but to actually ban hi-cap mags and certain class of firearms. This is part of the problem . . . Obama undoubtedly sees these regulations as trying to control or mitigate the violence. I don't think that many people want to ban certain types of guns just for the sake of banning guns . . . right or wrong they think that banning guns would reduce gun violence. Similarly, someone who is strongly pro-life doesn't want to ban abortions just for the sake of banning abortions . . . they think that they are saving lives. This, IMO, is the extreme side of the coin. If reinstating something that was already previously the law in the US and sunsetted is your idea of extreme . . . well . . . some might say that you're crying wolf. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 BUT nothing on that list would have prevented the tragedy at Newtown save armed LEO's at the school. (something missing from the 2011 and 2012 budget, unsure who made the cuts) He murdered his mother and stole her firearms. IIRC, he had actually been denied the right to purchase a firearm. Also the whole 40% of gun sales comment was out of context as it is actually "40% of all re-sales" not 40% of all sales.......... We'll never know. Again, I support back ground checks, sharing data base info, funding police and placing them in schools. I even support yearly renewal of permits. requiring a "safe" to secure your firearms so that they can not be stolen and subsequently used. I do not support any way shape or form the banning of a class of firearms or magazines. I think I have a more "moderate" view of management of the issue and do not consider it to be extreme. Here is a lengthy article showing some good statistics ref firearms. http://factcheck.org...c-vs-gun-facts/ I agree with your last comment for sure. Sadly, it also goes for politicians having to be crazier as well. Politics, IMO, has almost become like a rabid fan base. No middle ground. My team or bust. Screw your team etc......... It is almost as though the state of politics today has taken on the tone of the Cold War. With dems and reps playing the role of the US and USSR where the only losers are the American people. I do not remember, in my lifetime, a more divisive climate in DC. Agreed. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Tell that to any special interest groups on either side. I agree to your point but that isn't how it works in Washington. That doesn't mean that you have to pick one extremist side or the other. Without you and your dollars . . . how much influence do you think that they would have? I said that I have never supported them and have never been a member. I have never sent them any money. Despite the emphasis I didn't intend you in particular. Without their millions(?) of paid members they don't have any influence. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It is kind of ironic that one side is just absolutely appalled that criminals can get guns easily and they are the same ones that just handed over thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels so they can kill Americans. I wonder if they did back ground checks on them. Who handed over thousands of guns to the Mexican drug cartels? I see this getting upvoted . . . it leads me to believe that some people really aren't too familiar with the facts of F&F . . . if that's what is being referred to here... Link to comment
beanman Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It is kind of ironic that one side is just absolutely appalled that criminals can get guns easily and they are the same ones that just handed over thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels so they can kill Americans. I wonder if they did back ground checks on them. Who handed over thousands of guns to the Mexican drug cartels? I see this getting upvoted . . . it leads me to believe that some people really aren't too familiar with the facts of F&F . . . if that's what is being referred to here... What is F&F? Link to comment
Recommended Posts