HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Gabrielle Giffords’ Husba...

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:11 PM

Gabrielle Giffords’ Husband Smacks Down Wayne LaPierre

Source: Washington Post

Perhaps the most important moment so far in today’s Senate Judiciary hearing on guns came when astronaut Mark Kelly directly confronted NRA head Wayne LaPierre over the shooting of his wife, Gabrielle Giffords. Between that exchange and another one involving Senator Dick Durbin, LaPierre’s argument was completely unmasked for the sham that it is.

During the hearing, LaPierre repeatedly voiced the talking point that there’s no need to expand the background check system because criminals don’t cooperate with background checks. Kelly responded:

The Tuscon shooter was an admitted drug user. He was rejected from the U.S. Army because of his drug use. He was clearly mentally ill. And when he purchased that gun in November, his plan was to assassinate my wife and commit mass murder at that Safeway in Tucson. He was a criminal. Because of his drug use, and because of what he was planning on doing. But because of these gaps in the mental health system, in this case, those 121,000 records, I admit did not include a record on him. But it could have.

And if it did, he would have failed that background check. he would have likely gone to a gun show, or a private seller, and avoided that background check. But if we close that gun show loophole, if we require private sellers to complete a background check, and we get those 121,000 records and others into the systems, we will prevent gun crime. That is an absolute truth. It would have happened in Tucson. My wife would not have been sitting here today if we had stronger background checks.


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/01/30/gabrielle-giffords-husband-smacks-down-wayne-lapierre/

62 replies, 15016 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 62 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gabrielle Giffords’ Husband Smacks Down Wayne LaPierre (Original post)
Purveyor Jan 2013 OP
Scuba Jan 2013 #1
freshwest Jan 2013 #7
calimary Jan 2013 #30
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #2
jinx1 Jan 2013 #5
DaveJ Jan 2013 #10
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #13
PADemD Jan 2013 #21
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #44
wordpix Jan 2013 #47
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #50
Blandocyte Jan 2013 #22
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #43
wordpix Jan 2013 #48
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #49
merrily Jan 2013 #53
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #54
Kolesar Jan 2013 #23
yorokmok Jan 2013 #26
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #42
jeff47 Jan 2013 #27
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #41
jeff47 Jan 2013 #45
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #51
jeff47 Jan 2013 #58
tpsbmam Jan 2013 #59
Berlum Jan 2013 #3
Plucketeer Jan 2013 #4
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #9
Plucketeer Jan 2013 #55
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #56
jonthebru Jan 2013 #14
azureblue Jan 2013 #17
IthinkThereforeIAM Jan 2013 #36
Kolesar Jan 2013 #24
OldRedneck Jan 2013 #28
jeff47 Jan 2013 #29
ROBROX Jan 2013 #6
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #8
ProudProgressiveNow Jan 2013 #11
LineReply .
libodem Jan 2013 #12
hack89 Jan 2013 #15
Crepuscular Jan 2013 #16
rivegauche Jan 2013 #18
LibGranny Jan 2013 #19
kentuck Jan 2013 #20
maryland native Jan 2013 #25
BudHardener Jan 2013 #31
EC Jan 2013 #32
lotsofsnowplease Jan 2013 #33
Ian Iam Jan 2013 #34
Skittles Jan 2013 #35
another_liberal Jan 2013 #37
llmart Jan 2013 #38
rightsideout Jan 2013 #39
triplepoint Jan 2013 #40
LittleGirl Jan 2013 #46
Democratic Principle Jan 2013 #52
MisterP Jan 2013 #57
Mkap Jan 2013 #60
Aerows Jan 2013 #61
drynberg Feb 2013 #62

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:21 PM

1. You can be heard on this!!! Today only!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:37 PM

7. Thanks - let' get that one kicked up for visibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:17 PM

30. And don't forget the TOLL FREE numbers to Capitol Hill:

They're here in my sig line just below. I checked out the whole list a few weeks ago and these were the ones that were still good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:24 PM

2. There is a huge problem with having guns available only to people with no history of mental health

issues.

First, people who need mental health care will hesitate and often refuse to get it because they will fear that they could then be blacklisted. Should they be driving cars? To what extent should their ability to enjoy rights others have be limited on the basis of their disability?

Why would a person who is a potential killer seek or agree to accept mental health care if they feel they will be treated as a less trustworthy person because of it?

Second, too many people will just slip through the cracks. This is particularly true of drug users who may already be estranged from the people who would insure they got mental health care and were listed as ineligible for a gun license.

Third, assuming that people living in the country and people in certain neighborhoods or professions need to be able to have guns for personal protection, why should a person who had a nervous breakdown ten years ago be unable now to get a job that requires him to have a gun?

This is one of those broad-sweeping solutions to a problem that needs to be carefully thought through.

Is there any solution to our gun problem that does not involve labeling a large number of people with mental health issues as a danger to society?

Would any law that targeted people with a history of psychiatric problems as unfit to have a gun be found unconstitutional because it was overbroad?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:34 PM

5. Too much credit

By virtue of that fact you are over thinking the issue you have left the mentally challenged behind. Very often they don't have option to seek help but are ordered to get it through the courts because of some intervening event so they have no choice. These are often the ones to watch out for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:42 PM

10. Sure, I could easily fail a drug test.

By the above logic, someone failing any drug test for employment would not be able to buy a gun.

I agree that if we have guns, that's unfair. I suppose, though, there could be a simple solution. If you fail a drug test, you are then informed you have been put on the 'no handgun' list. You then fill out some forms and do some things to show you are not a danger to society. Sure a few can fake it, but many mentally ill people would never go through the hassle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:55 PM

13. probably depends on how 'psychiatric problems' is defined.

The current standard of an individual being adjudicated mentally deficient, or held involuntarily for evaluation for a period of 24h or more, is legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:28 PM

21. Do you think someone who has been diagnosed

As a paranoid schizophrenic should have access to guns? I don't. Schizophrenia is a life long illness; and there are frequent relapses, even with treatment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PADemD (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:06 PM

44. Problem is that there are false diagnoses as there are with all illnesses.

In addition, only a very small percentage of schizophrenics commit these horrendous crimes. And some of the people who commit them have never been diagnosed with anything. This is especiallly true of murder/suicides that I read about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #44)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:38 PM

47. I work with older teenagers & I can easily tell you

if I had to run out of the room briefly, which ones I trust leaving my purse behind with and which I do not. My point is a psychiatrist, social worker, doctor or anyone else in a professional capacity working in the mental health field should be able to tell who should or should not have a gun.

Before my mom had Alzheimer's disease, she would have been fine owning a gun if she went through a safety course. Now, there's no way. The difference between mental stability and instability is very clear. If there's a gray area, err on the side of caution, do not issue a permit and do further background checking. Let the gun manufacturers and gun sellers making their billions pay a tax that will cover the cost of background checks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #47)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:40 PM

50. That would make sense except that if keeping and bearing arms is a fundamental right,

it might not be possible to base denying that right on the subjective opinion of a social worker, psychologist or even psychotherapist. It's tough enough deciding whether a defendant is sane enough to be tried for murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:32 PM

22. Also, the decision about what conditions are a mental illness is political and somewhat arbitrary

Homosexuality was a mental illness as defined by the APA in the Diagnostic Statistical Manual until the 70s. Who knows what other "mental illnesses" could be cooked up with the result of limiting someone's rights?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blandocyte (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:04 PM

43. Yes. The diagnosis of just one doctor who might have some ulterior motive or have a problem

himself could label a person for life.

This would be too arbitrary and too overbroad to pass a legal test for constitutionality in my humble opinion. I'm not an expert in this area, but it just strikes me as being an arbitrary test that would prohibit people who had a problem but were not dangerous from exercising a right they might want to exercise.

No. Targeting the so-called mentally ill is probably not the solution.

In addition to my other problems with this idea (which appealed to me until I thought a lot about it) is the fact that, let's say a spouse who was committed at the insistence of an abusive spouse would be unable to obtain a gun to protect him- or herself from the very abusive spouse that committed him/her. The abusive spouse would, on the other hand, potentially have no problem getting a gun.

That situation is not as unusual as you might think or wish. This idea of deciding who gets a gun according to their mental health history just does not work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #43)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:48 PM

48. oh geesh, you've got a lotta straw men in that argument

I mean, you're concocting all kinds of maybe-iffy problems.

I live with an elderly parent who has Alzheimer's disease. This person should not own a gun because she can't distinguish reality, has psychotic episodes and delusions, and hallucinates. I'm sure everyone whose examined her since she got Alz. would agree---no guns, end of story.

I also have two friends with grown children who have mental health problems, big ones. Their parents do not want them to own guns and I don't, either, whether they have been examined by two shrinks or 15. They should not have guns, period.

There might be cases that are not so clear cut but I say, err on the side of caution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #48)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:37 PM

49. But what you and I would say is not the question.

I'm asking what the Supreme Court is most likely to say.

I would not put all my hopes in refusing the right to keep and bear arms to the mentally ill.

We have to find a better way to deal with this. We have to regulate guns some other way just in case the background checks to exclude the mentally ill are not accepted by the Court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to JDPriestly (Reply #43)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 10:08 AM

54. Being denied a gun > Being shot and killed by someone with mental issues

Sorry, I've got little sympathy in that situation.

It's not the end of the world if someone is denied the ability to purchase a gun.

It is the end of the world, to at least yourself, if you are shot and killed by someone with obvious mental issues yet someone who was allowed to legally purchase a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:38 PM

23. A seven day waiting period would be fair

The weapon-makers managed to squash that idea and substitute an "instant background check" back in the 1990s. That background check had loopholes for black-market merchants. The gangster advocates

You raise very good points. The NRAers are trying to deflect this story into an insincere program to focus on people with mental health problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:58 PM

26. To your first two points...

If we follow the logic of your first point (potential killers will not seek mental health care) we can start to eliminate laws against people who seek a drivers license when they have a current history of seizures. People will hide this if they can so that they can retain their drivers license and drive legally. That is just one example.

For your second point (people slip through the cracks) there are a number of situations where people slip through the cracks and have privileges that they wouldn't normally have. Sex offenders who move and do not register because the residence is near a prohibited area or felons who don't show up on government lists. Do we eliminate laws associated with restrictions on pedophiles and felons because we may not be able to track them all effectively?

Please keep in mind these are just examples and I am not equating pedophiles or felons with the mentally ill but the regulations that we currently see as commonplace around the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yorokmok (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:58 PM

42. Your arguments might persuade me, but I'm not sure they would persuade a majority of Supreme

Court justices. The drivers' license argument does not work too well because a lot of people with licenses should not be driving. And if you are prone to seizures but have never had one, you would not have enough information to know that you should not apply for a license.

Besides, who decides whether a person is to be committed?

The Soviet Union used to commit people to mental institutions just because they were political dissidents. In our country, parents and others sometimes commit a person who is inconvenient or temporarily troubled for similarly frivolous reasons. On the other hand, many people with seriously violent tendencies are never committed. Think of the Unabomber some years ago. He was odd but whether he was mentally ill was in dispute. He certainly had violent tendencies, but he was not committed prior to his arrest.

Kaczynski's lawyers, headed by Montana federal defender Michael Donahoe, attempted to enter an insanity defense to save Kaczynski's life, but Kaczynski rejected this plea. A court-appointed psychiatrist diagnosed Kaczynski as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, but declared him competent to stand trial. Kaczynski's family said Ted would psychologically "shut down" when pressured. In the book, Technological Slavery, Kaczynski recalls two prison psychologists, Dr. James Watterson and Dr. Michael Morrison, who visited him almost every day for a period of four years, who told him that they saw no indication that he suffered from any such serious mental illness, and that the diagnosis of his being paranoid schizophrenic was "ridiculous" and a "political diagnosis." Dr. Morrison made remarks to him about psychologists and psychiatrists providing any desired diagnosis if they are well paid for doing so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:02 PM

27. The restrictions are not on people who have ever sought mental heath care

The restrictions are on people who have been involuntarily committed because they were a danger to themselves or others.

That's an extremely high bar to cross. And if you're crazy enough to get over it, you're crazy enough that we can't trust you with a gun.

And all of the proposals are keeping the threshold at that same, very high level. No one is proposing to ban someone based on seeking out care for run-of-the-mill depression or bipolar or any other condition where you have not been legally declared a threat to yourself or others.

The NRA is pushing the "keep them away from the crazies" angle in an attempt to thwart the entire effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:50 PM

41. If it only affects people who have been committed it would still miss a lot of people and affect

people it should not affect. It would be a lifelong stigma. Families would not want to commit a family member because it could put at risk the entire family's access to a gun.

How many of the people who have gone on gun-killing sprees were previously committed?

Some, but by no means all would be my guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #41)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:39 PM

45. Who, exactly, should it not affect?

A judge has ruled that they're insane. There is no 100% guaranteed treatment for people in that condition - even if medication can control their problems it is extremely common for such people to stop taking their pills every so often.

Families would not want to commit a family member because it could put at risk the entire family's access to a gun.

All of the proposals restrict the person, not the family. The family can presumably use a safe or trigger lock.

And if a family decides to fuck over a family member so that they can keep a gun, I don't want them to have a gun. Or the right to vote. Or anything else where they have to make important decisions, because clearly they are unable to do so.

Some, but by no means all would be my guess.

Well, since the laws against murder and rape are not 100% effective, we should eliminate those, right?

Oh wait, that would be monumentally fucking stupid.

Keeping guns away from the criminally insane is a small part of what needs to be done. It will not stop all shootings, it's just really dumb not to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #45)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:49 PM

51. When you deny a person a fundamental right, you have to do it very carefully.

The Supreme Court has viewed the right to keep and bear arms as fundamental. It can be regulated, but under what circumstances it can be denied will be carefully considered by the Court.

That is the problem with denying the right to keep and bear arms to a category of "mentally ill."

And I don't think that all those who have committed the horrible mass murders had been determined by a judge to be mentally ill to the point that they were committed. I really don't think that is the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #51)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:22 PM

58. Which is why I'm only supporting a ban on those declared legally insane

Meaning they got their day in court.

This happens to match every single gun control proposal. Though gun fetishists keep pretending you'll be banned if you ever seek any mental health care in order to keep fondling their weapons.

And I don't think that all those who have committed the horrible mass murders had been determined by a judge to be mentally ill to the point that they were committed

Good thing I never said it was. But nice try at dodging.

The point of all the other proposed regulations is to reduce the damage caused by people who 'fall through the cracks'. That's why the mentally ill part is a very small part of the regulations we need to enact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:51 PM

59. I've made the same argument regarding a number of your points and on top of those....

this generalized talk about "psychiatric" disorders or the like is ridiculous. It's the equivalent of lumping the common cold and cancer together in the same category.

WTF is meant by psychiatric disorders? You're lumping, e.g., people with anxiety disorders....like a fear of flying or even a generalized anxiety disorder....in with someone who is a paranoid schizophrenic. Not in the same categories at all. Anorexia is a psychiatric disorder. That the same as schizophrenia?

And what about the Axis II disorders? Having a dependent personality disorder is WAY different from having an antisocial personality disorder? But in terms of gun ownership, could they be weighted evenly?

As a mental health professional, I sure as hell wouldn't want to be rating my patients according to their safety to own a gun and reporting that to some agency! We're mandated to report those who are a danger to others when there is a specific, identifiable threat. And we're mandated to act to keep a patient safe when he/she is a danger to self. But to start being in judgment seat and rating every single patient in terms of gun safety would destroy the ability of mental health professionals to be able to help a significant percentage of people.

THE most important part of therapy is the relationship between the treating professional and his/her patient. And one of the keys to that is TRUST! How the hell does that happen when patients know that their therapist is assessing them and reporting them, which is a huge violation of privacy? As a mental health professional, I can tell you that it would stop MANY from seeking care (even some with relatively circumscribed neuroses, like fear of flying) and, if they did, from telling the truth in therapy -- how the hell does therapy work, then?

Until this gets VERY specific and greatly narrows the "mental health" limitations to gun ownership, this focus on a generic mental health provision is destructive & completely misguided.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:28 PM

3. The freaking NRA has gone off the tracks

...and everybody is noticing...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:30 PM

4. What boggles my mind

is that this whole 2nd Amnd. thing is really an argument based on ignorance. Unless Thom Hartmann boldly lied to us, the well regulated militias were a form of enforcement for slave control - a hedge of slave rebellion in the southern states - the amendment actually having been draft twice - in an effort to keep slave owners happy! and yet.......
EVERY friggin' "news" outlet you hear from, talks as if the whole thing was about national security - which it wasn't. And yet both sides talk about the issue as if it's solidly based in history - bogus history.

Honestly? I don't even wanna take a side anymore. What's the worth of arguing invalid points - I mean, beyond wanting no more domestic gun killings? We'd do just as relevant work arguing the Empire vs. the Rebels in a galaxy far, far away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:40 PM

9. Almost every state, including non-slaveholding states had the same provision in their state constitu

tions.

So while to the southern states it may have been convenient for that purpose, or even desired for that purpose, that was absolutely not the main purpose behind it.

Otherwise, I cannot imagine why non-slaveholding states would have ratified the same (wording varies, but most mirror the 2nd amendment) clause for their own state-level purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 11:49 AM

55. Here's what I was referring to....

Had you seen this already? Is it me, or Thom, that don't understand?

&feature=player_embedded

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:01 PM

56. Yes, that's the piece I was thinking of.

I think Thom is off the map a bit on that. There is one historian that I know of that has been advancing this idea for some time, but it doesn't fit with the 'RKBA' picture nationwide, or even just colony-wide around the time of the ratification of the constitution.

But I have no doubt that it was used and found to be very convenient by those southern slaveholding states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:58 PM

14. My understanding is

that the "founders" did not want a standing Army, it would cost to much and able bodied men would be non- productive, it being better for them to go home and work their land rather than be in a barracks situation. So the militia concept was used. The idea Thom spoke of is an example of how various states would use the militia. The "tyrants" that the NRA and its ilk speak of is a false premise. The tyrants spoken of was not our government, but the British monarchy. It was thought that they could invade again. The premise that citizens would overthrow our government was not considered. In fact it was the opposite. The "Whiskey Rebellion" was put down by militias led by George Washington to assist in preserving our nation. That was a revolt about taxes ironically. Paying taxes and participating in our democracy is a patriotic act, the right has to get with the program, but most of them are simply brainwashed.
Our education system has failed many people.
Two other items, Switzerland and Israel are shown as gun ownership examples. Yes, every Swiss male owns a firearm, but it is locked in the Armory. In Israel in the past Army personnel took their weapons home after work. Then after a rash of suicides it became policy to store the firearms at their barracks rather then give access to the personnel at home...

I believe in the words "well-regulated."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonthebru (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:16 PM

17. Pretty close to it

the founders wanted a small standing Army of professional soldiers, but couldn't afford one big enough to defend the whole country. At the time, there were privately and locally funded "militias" that took on the task of local warfare with whatever - Indians, thieves, soldiers, etc. But when the militias' money and food ran out, the soldiers would often go home, and they were often not much more than a bunch of farmers and merchants with muskets. The 2nd was phrased like that to have a group of citizen soldiers, that is, trained civilians much like the National Guard, that could be called up in case of emergency. I read the 2nd not as a matter of gun rights, but as a foundation for the creation of the National Guard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:39 PM

36. Yep...


... it has been mentioned before that once the national guard system was set up, the, "well regulated militia", part became obsolete, as the National Guard, as they say themselves, are the, "Modern Minutemen".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonthebru (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:42 PM

24. A general could use his standing army to take over Congress & the Executive department

Beat and kill people, then publish a version of events that legitimized his regime. Thus would end the Constitution.

The Brits kept their armies way out in the colonies for a reason!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonthebru (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:06 PM

28. "raise and Army," "maintain a Navy"

Folks need to closely read the Constitution on the issue of Army, Navy, and militia. I don't have the exact words at hand, but, there's a difference.

The Constitution gave Congress authority to "maintain a Navy" but only to "raise and Army."

The idea was that a Navy was difficult and expensive to put together on short notice, and, we needed a Navy. Thus, Congress was empowered to spend the money to maintain a Navy. That is, keep a Navy afloat, staffed, and equipped.

At the same time, the idea was the a standing Army was not needed. After all, from where would a ground invasion arise? The local militias were sufficient to defend against restless Native Americans. If a threat of invasion developed, we would have sufficient time to form an Army around a small professional core, fleshed out with the militia.

Of course, in the "gun rights debate," good sense, history, and logic all were pushed aside long ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:07 PM

29. There was a national security angle

Washington and a few others didn't want a standing federal army. The theory of the time was that monarchs with standing armies would always decide to use those armies to conquer.

So the idea was to deny the federal government an army, so that the feds would be dependent on the states for defense in the hopes that the feds would not be able to go on offense.

The founders had multiple reasons to do damn near everything in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:35 PM

6. ANY ATTEMPT IS BETTER THAN NONE

 

Any check no matter what th check is a start with keeping the BAD OR NUTS from having a fire arm.

Those who are EVIL will not like have controls to prevent wrong from occurring. Those who are EVIL will support BAD people or CRAZIES having a gun so they can KILL.

There are more crazy and bad people out there who want to do what is considered normal weather it is driving a car, owning a gun, or having a good life.

Guns provide people a way of avoid a normal way of interacting with other people. People with guns like to SILENCE those who disagree with them by both legal and illegal methods like KILLING PEOPLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:37 PM

8. Could have?

Stone-simple step #1: remove the 'incentive' reporting requirement, where states that meet certain reporting criteria get access to a small pool of money, and instead, withhold federal money if they don't comply.

On the other hand, I have no idea why the NRA is opposing universal checks. Doesn't really make any logical sense. The cost is minimal. The delay is minimal. The NRA has supported far more invasive gun control measures in the past, so I can assume this is only a result of the far-right bias of the recent NRA board of directors, which has become increasingly polarized in the last 20 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:49 PM

11. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:51 PM

12. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:01 PM

15. He is right about the background checks

my state closed the gun show loophole with no problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:11 PM

16. It's a start

Two things should be pursued as the beginning of meaningful changes to the law that may actually result in less gun violence. First, all firearms transfers should be required to go through a licenses FFL holder and be subject to a NICS check. Secondly, we should establish a federal firearms owners license, similar to what some states have. In order to obtain that license, you should have to undergo a background check and any records such as legal convictions, mental health screening, etc. should be included in that background check. That license would have to be renewed annually and would have to be in your possession to purchase a gun or ammunition or whenever carrying a weapon. No valid license and there should be a stiff penalty. That kind of reasonable and meaningful reform would gain the support of a large majority of voters, IMO, including most reasonable gun owners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:16 PM

18. And meanwhile,. at the very same time of these hearings

another maladjusted, violent loser went on a shooting spree in Arizona, with 3 people shot. Just another day, another senseless act of gun carnage and La Pierre spews his sick garbage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:22 PM

19. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:25 PM

20. C'mon Democrats!

Bring it up for a vote. Make these assholes take a stand on this. This is crazy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:53 PM

25. Concept v. Reality

Mark Kelly is a retired Astronaut and Navy fighter pilot. Clearly a tough man with many defensive skills.

James Brady was a staffer for a very conservative administration.

While we cannot infer any stance on gun control from those facts, the common theme is that both confronted the extreme violence of firearms up close and personally. Their lives were profoundly impacted.

Wayne LaPierre looks at firearms only as a concept. While I can see some of his points, and some may have merit, I cannot go with his opinion completely.

I find it interesting that those who have been directly impacted by gun violence and do not simply view it as a concept, have strong anti gun opinions.

I think I will have to defer to those coming from a position of reality.

Mark Kelly's past, training, and experiences leave little room for anyone to "question his manhood" based on an anti gun stance.

The NRA simply has little standing in this issue anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:17 PM

31. He was a criminal because of his drug use.

It wasn't a drug that shot Gabby, it was a gun. The continuing criminalization of victimless (granted, the only victimless part of Loughner's activities) use of drugs distracts from the real message and harms the argument that gun sales at gun shows needs to be regulated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:25 PM

32. How about treating a gun license like the drivers license?

Have an written test and physical testing to get a license. The written test could include some of the same psychological testing that corps do in employment testing. Physical testing could include safe storage, usage etc. Then the license would also have to be renewed at intervals (maybe 5 years?) for re-testing and if anything shows up on record - deny a renewal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:30 PM

33. It's all about the money

 


The NRA cares more about money than any stinking human beings life. What can a human being buy them? A human being aint worth nothing to Wayne LaPierre and his money grubbing friends. Their aint no pictures of dead presidents on a human being. Humans aint gold either.
Arming the good guys, the bad guys and any guy is what the NRA wants. Cha ching says the NRA till.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:43 PM

34. And, if there's any bloke who deserves a smackdown...

 

it is The Great Horse's Arse LaPierre. DURec!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:00 PM

35. more people need to stand up to these NRA cowards

and it is WAY PAST F***ING TIME

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 06:46 PM

37. Good for him.

If a few more people, like Mr. Kelly, would just confront the NRA with facts, they would soon disappear back into the shadows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:16 PM

38. Now is the time for the sane ones of us to take a stand.....

and have our voices heard. There are way more of us than them, but we haven't demanded our voices be heard. But I think that after Newtown we are READY.

People are busy - I get that - but we have to take the time to call or write. It doesn't take that much time or effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:18 PM

39. The Astronaut has more intelligence and credibility

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:30 PM

40. You Know The NRA By Their "Enemies" & Their Directors...

 

The NRA's ENEMIES LIST

AARP
AFL-CIO
Ambulatory Pediatric Association
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Civil Liberties Union
American Academy of Ambulatory Care Nursing
American Medical Women’s Association
American Medical Student Association
American Medical Association
American Association for the Surgery of Trauma
American Trauma Society
American Federation of Teachers
American Association of School Administrators
American Alliance for Rights and Responsibilities
American Medical Association
American Bar Association
American Counseling Association
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association for World Health
American Ethical Union
American Nurses Association
American Association of Neurological Surgeons
American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences
American Firearms Association
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
American Jewish Committee
American Trauma Society
American Psychological Association
American Jewish Congress
American Public Health Association
Americans for Democratic Action
Anti-Defamation League
Black Mental Health Alliance
B’nai B’rith
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Children’s Defense Fund
Church of the Brethren
Coalition for Peace Action
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
College Democrats of America
Committee for the Study of Handgun Misuse & World Peace
Common Cause
Congress of National Black Churches, Inc.
Congress of Neurological Surgeons
Consumer Federation of America
Council of the Great City Schools
Council of Chief State School Officers
Dehere Foundation
Disarm Educational Fund
Environmental Action Foundation
Episcopal Church-Washington Office
Florence and John Shumann Foundation
Friends Committee on National Legislation
General Federation of Women’s Clubs
George Gund Fun
Gray Panthers
H.M. Strong Foundation
Hadassah
Harris Foundation
Hechinger Foundation
Interfaith Neighbors
Int’l Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union
Int’l Association of Educators for World Peace
Jewish Labor Committee
Joyce Foundation
Lauder Foundation
Lawrence Foundation
League of Women Voters of the United States*
Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Manhattan Project II
Mennonite Central Committee-Washington Office
National Safe Kids Campaign
National Association of Police Organizations
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
National Black Nurses’ Association
National Association of Chain Drug Stores
National Network for Youth
National Assembly of National Voluntary Health & Social Welfare Organizations
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
National Association of School Psychologists
National Association of Counties*
National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners
National Association of School Safety and Law Enforcement Officers
National Education Association
National Association of Elementary School Principals*
National Association of Public Hospitals
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Association of Social Workers
National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Related Institutions
National Association of School Psychologists
National Council of La Raza
National Center to Rehabilitate Violent Youth
National Commission for Economic Conversion & Disarmament
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA
National Council of Negro Women
National Association of Community Health Centers
National People’s Action
National Education Association*
National League of Cities
National Council on Family Relations
National Council of Jewish Women
National Organization for Women
National Political Congress of Black Women
National Parks and Conservation Association
National Peace Foundation
National Urban League, Inc.
National Parent, Teachers Association*
National Urban Coalition
National SAFE KIDS Campaign
National Organization on Disability
National Spinal Cord Injury Association
NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
Ortenberg Foundation
Peace Action
People for the American Way
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Police Foundation
Project on Demilitarization and Democracy
Public Citizen
SaferWorld
Society of Critical Care Medicine
Southern Christian Leadership Conference
The Council of the Great City Schools
The Synergetic Society
20/20 Vision
U.S. Catholic Conference, Dept. of Social Development
Union of American Hebrew Congregations
Unitarian Universalist Association
United States Catholic Conference
United Methodist Church, General Board & Church Society
United Church of Christ, Office for Church in Society*
United States Conference of Mayors
War and Peace Foundation
Women Strike for Peace
Women’s National Democratic Club
Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND)
Women’s Int’l League for Peace and Freedom
World Spiritual Assembly, Inc.
YWCA of the U.S.A.
Krista Allen – Actress
Suzy Amis – Actress
Louis Anderson – Comedian
Richard Dean Anderson – Actor
Maya Angelou – Poet
David Arquette – Actor
Ed Asner – Actor
Alec Baldwin – Actor
Bob Barker – TV Personality
Carol Bayer Sager – Composer
Drew Barrymore – Actress
Kevin Bacon – Actor
Lauren Bacall – Actress*
Sarah Ban Breathnach – Writer
William Baldwin – Actor
Candice Bergen – Actress
Richard Belzer – Actor
Tony Bennett – Singer
Boys II Men – Pop Group
Jon Bon Jovi – Singer
Peter Bogdonovich – Director
Peter Bonerz – Actor
Albert Brooks – Actor
Beau Bridges – Actor
Benjamin Bratt – Actor
Bonnie Bruckheimer – Movie Producer
Christie Brinkley – Model
Dr. Joyce Brothers – Psychologist/Author
James Brolin – Actor
James Brooks – TV Producer
Mel Brooks – Actor/Director
Betty Buckley – Actress
Ellen Burstyn – Actress
Steve Buscemi – Actor
David Canary – Actor
Kate Capshaw – Actress
Kim Cattrall- Actress
Josh Charles – Actor
Robert Chartloff – Producer
Stockard Channing – Actress
Jill Clayburgh – Actress
Terri Clark – Singer
George Clooney – Actor
Jackie Cooper – Actor/Director*
Jennifer Connelly – Actress
Judy Collins – Singer
Kevin Costner – Actor
Sean Connery – Actor
Sheryl Crow – Singer
Billy Crystal- Actor
Julie Cypher – Director
Arlene Dahl – Actress
Clive Davis – Writer
Linda Dano – Actress
Matt Damon – Actor
Pam Dawber – Actress
Patrika Darbo – Actress
Stuart Damon – Actor
Ellen Degeneres – Actress
Gavin de Becker – Writer
Rebecca DeMornay – Actress
Danny DeVito – Actor
Michael Douglas – Actor
Phil Donahue – Talk Show Host
Richard Donner – Director
Fran Drescher – Actress
Richard Dreyfus – Actor
David Duchovny – Actor
Sandy Duncan – Actress
Christine Ebersole – Actress
Kenneth “Babyface” Edmonds – Singer
Missy Elliott – Singer
Nora Ephron – Director
Gloria Estefan – Singer
Melissa Etheridge – Singer
Mia Farrow – Actress
Mike Farrell – Actor
Carrie Fisher – Actress
Sally Field – Actress
Doug Flutie – NFL player
Fannie Flagg – Actress
Jane Fonda – Actress
Jodie Foster – Actress
Rick Fox – NBA Player
Andy Garcia – Actor
Art Garfunkel – Singer
Geraldo – TV personality
Richard Gere – Actor
Kathie Lee Gifford – TV personality
Paul Glaser – TV director
Brad Gooch – Writer
Elliott Gould – Actor
Louis Gossett, Jr. – Actor
Michael Gross – Actor
Nancy Lee Grahn – Actress
Bryant Gumbel – TV Personality
Deidra Hall – Actress
Ethan Hawke – Actor
Mariette Hartley – Actress
Mark Harmon – Actor
Anne Heche – Actress
Howard Hessman – Actor
Marilu Henner – Actress
Dustin Hoffman – Actor
Hal Holbrook – Actor*
Helen Hunt – Actress
Grace-Lynne Ingle – Actress
John Ingle – Actor
Francesca James – TV Producer
Norman Jewison – Director
Lainie Kazan – Actress
Richard Karn – Actor
Jeffrey Katzenberg – Producer
Barry Kemp – TV Producer
David E. Kelley – TV Producer
Diane Keaton – Actress
Margaret Kemp – Interior Designer
Chaka Khan – Singer
Coreta Scott King – Activist
Kevin Kline – Actor
Michael E. Knight – Actor
Jonathan Kozol – Writer
William Kovacs – Director
Lenny Kravits – Singer
Lisa Kudrow – Actress
Willy Kurth – Actor
Christine Lahti – Actress
k.d. lang – Singer
Ricki Lake – TV personality
Denis Leary – Actor
John Leguizamo – Actor
Norman Lear – TV Producer
Spike Lee – Director
Hal Linden – Actor
Lisa Linde – Actress
Tara Lipinski – Former Olympian
Keyshawn Johnson – NFL player
Rob Lowe – Actor
Amanda Marshall – Singer
Barry Manilow – Singer
Camryn Manheim – Actress
Howie Mandel – Actor
Kyle MacLachlan – Actor
Madonna – Singer
Marla Maples – Actress
Marsha Mason – Actress*
Mase – Singer
Penny Marshall – Director
Prema Mathai-Davis – YWCA Official
John McDaniel – Musician
John McEnroe – Athlete
Brian McKnight – Musician
Natalie Merchant – Singer
Bette Midler – Singer
Shane Minor – Musician
Mary Tyler Moore – Actress
Michael Moore – Film Maker
Norval Morris – Law Professor
Mike Myers – Actor
N Sync – Music group
Kathy Najimy – Actress
Jack Nicholson – Actor
Leonard Nimoy – Actor
Mike Nichols – Director
Stephen Nichols – Actor
Rosie O`Donnel l- Actress/Talk Show Host
Jennifer O Neill – Actress
Julia Ormond – Actress
Jane Pauley – TV Personality
Sarah Jessica Parker – Actress
Mandy Patinkin – Actor
Richard North Patterson – Writer
Rhea Perlman- Actress
Michelle Pfieffer – Actress
Sydney Pollack – Director
Aidan Quinn – Actor
Colin Quinn – Actor
Dennis Quaid – Actor
Elizabeth Bracco Quinn – Actress
Bonnie Raitt – Singer
Debbie Reynolds – Actress
Mary Lou Retton – Former Olympian
Paul Reiser – Actor
Peter Reckell – Actor
Rob Reiner – Actor/Director
Robert Redford – Actor/Director
Anne Rice – Writer
Cathy Rigby – Actress
Julia Roberts – Actress
Marc Rosen – TV Producer
Tim Robbins – Actor
Tim Roth – Actor
Renee Russo – Actress
Robin Ruzan – Wife of Mike Myers
Meg Ryan – Actress
Susan Sarandon – Actress
Jerry Seinfeld – Actor
Kyra Sedgwick – Actress
Martin Sheen – Actor
Russell Simmons – Record Producer
Neil Simon – Playwright*
Louise Sorel – Actress
Mira Sorvino – Actress
Rena Sofer – Actress
Britney Spears – Singer
Bruce Springsteen – Singer
Kevin Spirtas – Actor
Barbra Streisand – Singer
David Steinberg – Director
Sylvester Stallone – Actor
Harry Dean Stanton – Actor
Meryl Streep – Actress
Patrick Stewart – Actor
Sharon Stone – Actress
Sting – Singer
Trudie Styler – Actress
Jonathan Taylor Thomas – Actor
The Temptations – Pop Group
Vinny Testaverde – NFL player
Marlo Thomas – Actress*
Uma Thurman – Actress
Steve Tisch – Producer
Mike Torrez – Former Baseball player
Shania Twain – Singer
Dick Van Dyke – Actor
Eli Wallach – Actor*
Ruth Warrick – Actress
Harvey Weinstein – Producer
Jann Wenner – Publisher
Sigourney Weaver – Actress
Victor Webster – Actor
James Whitmore – Actor*
Andy Williams – Singer*
Kelli Williams – Actress
Henry Winkler – Actor
Oprah Winfrey – Entertainer
Rita Wilson – Actress
Vanessa Williams – Singer
Herman Wouk – Author
Joanne Woodward – Actress*
Peter Yarrow – Singer
Catherine Zeta-Jones – Actress
Ahmet Zappa -Actor
Diva Zappa -Actress
Dweezil Zappa – Musician
Gail Zappa -
Moon Zappa -Actress
* Membership on the Brady Campaign`s National Committee
Joel J. Alpert M.D. – Pediatrician
Robert Bernstein Ph.D – Pediatrician
Robert E. Brennan – Financier
Bishop Edmond Browning – Espiscopal Leader
James E. Carter – Former President
Marion Wright Edelman – Director, Childrens Defense Fund
Michael Eisner, Former Chairman and CEO The Walt Disney Company
Ahmet Ertegun – Music Producer
Amitai Etzioni – Teacher
Tom Freston – MTV President
Dr. Lorraine E. Hale – Social Worker
Della M. Hughes – Activist
Ed Koch – Former Politician
C. Everett Koop – Former Surgeon General
Rev. Wallace Ryan Kuroiwa – Clergyman
Davis S. Liederman – Ex. Dir. Child Welfare League
Paul Rabbi Menitaff – Clergyman
Abner Mikva – Former Judge
Richard Parsons – Pres. Time Warner
Steven Rockefeller – Financier
Ellen Y. Rosenberg – Activist
Rabbi David Saperstein – Clergyman
Herb Scannel – Pres. N
A & M Records
Record Production, Entertainment
American Century Companies
Mutual Fund & Stock Investment Company on NYSE
American Multi Cinemas Entertainment, Inc.
Movie Theater Company
Argosy Casino
Gambling Casino Company
Ben & Jerry`s Homemade, Inc.
Ice cream and frozen yogurt
BJC Health Systems
Healthcare Company
Blue Cross Blue Shield – Kansas City
Healthcare Company
Brooks Investments-Robert Brooks
Investment Company
Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc.
Retail clothing and accessories stores
Crown Central Petroleum Corp.
Refiners and marketers of petroleum products, convenience stores
Development Specialists – Chicago
Earthgrains – St. Louis
National Bread Company
General American – St. Louis
Life Insurance
Hallmark Cards
Greeting Card Company
Health Midwest
National Healthcare Company
ICN Biomedicals
Pharmaceutical products
James B. Nutter Co. – Kansas City
Investment Banker
Kansas City Chiefs
Pro Football Team
Kansas City Royals
Pro Baseball Team
Kenneth Cole
Clothing retailer
Lamar Advertising Company
Levi Strauss & Co.
Clothing
Mallinckrodt, Inc. – St. Louis
Clothing Starch Company
Michael Douglas Foundation
MNC Financial, Inc.
Banking, financial services
Sara Lee Corporation
Silver Dollar City
Amusement Parks
Site Oil Company – St. Louis
Oil Company
Southland Corporation
Convenience stores
Southwestern Bell Telephone- St. Louis
Telecommunications Firm
Sport & Health, Inc.
Health clubs and fitness centers
Sprint Corp PAC
Telecommunicaitons Firm
SSM Health System – St. Louis
Healthcare Company
St. Louis Rams
Pro Football Team
St. Louis University
Private Catholic University
Stoneyfield Farms Yogurt
Yogurt
Sverdrup Corp.
Engineering Firm
Time Warner Inc.
Publishing, film and music recordings
TMP Worldwide/Monster.Com online employment service
Unity Health – St. Louis
Healthcare Company
Working Assets
Capital Cities/ABC
Bell Atlantic-D.C.
Blue Chip Stamps
The Christian Publishing Society
Columbia Broadcasting Service
Corporation For Public Broadcasting/ PBS Television
Cox Newspapers
Gannett News Service
Johnson Publishing Company, Inc.
Knight-Ridder Newspapers
Miami Herald
Los Angeles Times
McCall`s Magazine
Motorcycle Cruiser Magazine
National Broadcasting Company
Newsweek Magazine
Rolling Stone Magazine
The New York Times Corporation
Time Magazine
Times-Mirror Corporation
The Baltimore Sun
The Tribune Company
Washington Post
-------------------------------

NRA Board of Directors

Here is the current Board of Directors for the NRA (has non-profit status at present). Time to reel_in_these_murderers_with the long arm of the Law:

Joe M. Allbaugh
William H. Allen
Dr. Thomas P. Arvas
Scott L. Bach
William A. Bachenberg
Frank E. Bachhuber Jr.
M. Carol Bambery
Bob Barr
Ronnie G. Barrett
Clel Baudler
David E. Bennett
J. Kenneth Blackwell
Matt Blunt
Dan Boren
Robert K. Brown
Pete Brownell
Dave Butz
J. William "Bill" Carter
Ted W. Carter
Richard Childress
Patricia A. Clark
Allan D. Cors
Charles L. Cotton,
David G. Coy
Larry E. Craig John L. Cushman
William H. Dailey
Joseph P. Debergalis Jr.
R. Lee "The Gunny" Ermey
Edie P. Fleeman
Joel Friedman
Sandra S. Froman
Tom Gaines
James S. Gilmore III
Marion P. Hammer
Maria Heil
Graham Hill
Stephen D. Hornady
Susan Howard
Roy Innis
H. Joaquin Jackson
Curtis S. Jenkins
David A. Keene
Tom King
Herbert A. "Herb" Lanford Jr.
Karl A. Malone
Carolyn Dodgen Meadows
John F. Milius
Bill Miller
Owen Buz Mills
Cleta Mitchell Grover G. Norquist
Oliver L. North
Robert "Bob" Nosler
Johnny Nugent
Ted Nugent
Lance Olson
Timothy W. Pawol
James W. Porter II
Peter "Jay" Printz
Todd J. Rathner
Wayne Anthony Ross
Carl T. Rowan Jr.
Dr. Don Saba
Robert E. Sanders
William H. Satterfield
Ronald L. Schmeits
Tom Selleck
John C. Sigler
Leroy Sisco
Dwight D. Van Horn
Linda Walker
Howard J. "Walt" Walter
J.D. Williams
Robert J. Wos
Don E. Young

Size of the U.S. Firearms Industry:
$12 Billion in Sales/yr
.
.

.
.

.
.

,
,

.
.


.
.


.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
Reference Link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmaster_M4_Type_Carbine
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.

I am so frustrated with our slowly-evolving/quickly devolving species. We have to go through so much hardship before we EVEN consider changing our ways. Good thing we're on a planet that is tucked away in an obscure location of the Milky Way Galaxy!
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.
Gun Nutters Swarm Gun Shows (Let me know when you've had enough of this insanity--the gun nutters that is):
.
.





http://www2.highlandstoday.com/mgmedia/image/0/0/168721/LAINSIDO1-gun-show-draws-a-crowd/










.
.
Future Adam Lanzas at a Gun Nut Show Near You:
.





.
.
.
"...We have to save each other because all victims are equal and none is more equal than others. It's everyone's duty to start the avalanche."

--Bartholomew "Barley" Scott Blair, "The Russia House"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:56 PM

46. thanks for posting

I'm glad I didn't miss that 'news'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:23 AM

52. Hiking - Scary

I took my girlfriend hiking in the Catskills. She was stunning, (sadly it didn't work out). It was just the two of us. We had walked for an hour or so. Four guys came down around the corner of the trail, drunk, loud & smoking dope. They stopped us and knew they had blocked our passing. They were acting wild, I was panicking. The stuff they were saying to my girlfriend got increasingly risquι. I could see this going very bad, and we're miles from anywhere. All of a sudden two guys came up behind us. Baseball caps, backpacks and they each had pistols on their hips. They read the situation almost immediately. Asked me why we were walking so fast? They had been trying to catch us for the last 10 minutes? The four guys saw the weapons, assumed we were together and quickly moved on. The two guys looked at us and asked if we were OK. They even offered to walk us down. It was a helplessness and fear I hope to never experience again. Bad scene. We waited for 30 minutes and walked back down to the car slowly saw no one and we were gone. We are all a product of our experiences. Sadly this was one of mine. Two guys appear with weapons and the bad guys walked.

On the psych issue. I am all for back ground checks. If that's the fall back position. However I'm reminded of my first psych class. We were told everyone, (and grew to believe), everyone has mental health issues, in varying degrees. Sensitivities to different; issues, insecurities, places, people, life events, scared of the dark... And those issues will increase / decrease, come and go and change over the course of our lives. Some stay positive and some who are alone, left in despair, or twisted too far snap. But the guns don't go away. Purchased when stable, but where are you now...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:00 PM

57. like Edward Teller, Herman Kahn, and the rest of the Powell Memo instrumentalities,

they're the enemies to all life: they love things--machines, cash, corporations--and will sacrifice the living (the whole planet, even) in the pursuit of their curious lust. They operate on the same principle that covers up dangerous and lethal mechanical and medical failures as "cost of business" and sends Objectivist keyboard warriors to jeer at any criticism or whistleblowing.

tl;dr: they're everyone's enemy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 09:17 PM

60. Big Business

Fear and Paranoia is big business for the NRA. They can scare the clueless sheeple into buying more guns or stop government from regulating the industry and inflating the price my 2-10 bucks , you think they really care about guns??? NOPE they and the gun industry just want your greenbacks. Murder INC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 09:45 PM

61. I have yet to hear

a compelling argument for why a person needs an assault rifle that carries 30 rounds at a time. I've also never heard a compelling argument for why people need these huge magazines for their guns. To me, those things aren't about self-defense. They are about offense and killing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Fri Feb 1, 2013, 07:55 AM

62. Why should the lobbiest group for gun & ammo makers (NRA) be tax deferred? And with 8% approving of

Their objection to background checks, how relevant are these shills? To parrot T. Hartman, why were they even involved with a Congressional Hearing? Who invited Wayne, come on now, let's see a hand so we all know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread