E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mike Groll / AP
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo delivers his third State of the State address at the Empire State Plaza Convention Center on Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2013, in Albany, N.Y. (AP Photo/Mike Groll)
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed “the toughest assault weapons ban in the nation” in his State of the State address Wednesday afternoon – a response to the mass shootings in Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., and the shooting deaths of firefighters in upstate New York.
“We must stop the madness,” Cuomo said.
“This is not about taking away peoples’ guns,” said Cuomo, adding that he’s gone hunting and owns a shotgun. “It is about ending the unnecessary risk of high-capacity assault rifles.”
Cuomo previously described New York’s assault weapons regulations as having “more holes than Swiss cheese.”
The governor proposed a seven-point plan that includes the elimination of all high-capacity magazines, regardless of the date of manufacture. New York law currently prohibits magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but excludes magazines made prior to 1994.
Cuomo also proposed background checks for all gun sales between private parties, as well as stricter penalties for the illegal purchase of weapons and measures to ensure that guns stay out of the hands of mentally ill individuals.
Even before the governor spoke, the topic stirred debate in New York, which is one of seven states that currently restrict the purchase and possession of assault weapons. The others are California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Maryland according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports gun control measures.
“New York’s assault weapons ban is, as he noted, riddled with loopholes, and it’s important to approach that with a fresh eye,” said Benjamin Van Houten, a managing attorney at the Law Center. “Currently California has the strongest state assault weapons ban, but I’m really encouraged by what the governor was saying today.”
Speculation is swirling around Vice President Biden's comments Wednesday that the president will take executive action to stem gun violence. NBC's Kristen Welker reports.
After Cuomo told a radio interviewer in December that “confiscation could be an option,” gun rights activists posted a petition to the White House’s web site calling any legislation restricting the sale and ownership of semi-automatic firearms “a clear violation of our rights as a free people.” The petition had 7,973 signatures as of late Wednesday morning.
Cuomo's aides have reportedly said the confiscation idea won't work, and he hasn't mentioned it since the radio interview.
Cuomo’s speech comes as lawmakers in other states and at the federal level direct more attention to the issue of gun control.
In Washington, Vice President Biden held the first in a series of gatherings at the White House aimed at trying to create a consensus on what to do about gun violence.
“The president is going to act,” Biden said while meeting with gun control proponents at the White House. “There are executive orders, executive action that can be taken.”
In Colorado, which is still reeling from the movie theater shooting that left 12 dead, Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, has urged legislators to take up the issue of gun control. The Associated Press reported that gun rights advocates planned a rally outside the state Capitol Wednesday, a day ahead of Hickenlooper’s own State of the State address.
An FBI review of all 2011 homicides for which data was available found that 67.8 percent of them involved firearms – 72.5 percent of which were handguns.
On Monday, more than one hundred New York state legislators called for new laws that would cut down on gun violence. Their proposed package calls for universal background checks on all gun sales, a more stringent ban on assault weapons, and a ban on the sale and possession of magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.
Senate Republican Leader Dean Skelos announced his own gun proposal on Saturday, suggesting mandatory sentences for possession of an illegal weapon and increased penalties for carrying a firearm in certain areas, like on school grounds.
“No new package of gun safety laws can be truly effective without including provisions that go after illegal guns and punish the people who use them against others,” Skelos said in a press release.
A spokesman for the governor knocked down Skelos’ proposal because it did not call for an outright ban on assault weapons.
“Any gun policy that doesn’t ban assault weapons ignores the reality of gun violence and insults the common sense of New Yorkers,” spokesman Josh Vlasto said.
Cuomo's efforts may be aided by the fact he is riding a wave of popularity. A Siena College poll conducted in November found that Cuomo is viewed favorably by 72 percent of New Yorkers.
Leave a Comment:
And so it begins.
Glad to hear that Cuomo's aides now tell the Govenor!
Simple solution, you must register each weapon owned.
For each weapon owned, there will be a $50,000 tax (the government can ALWAYS tax.)
Failure to pay the tax is a felony.
Under federal law, no felon may own a gun.
End of problem.
dirp
if you typed in your numbers correctly, then you are nucking futs!
and this stops a felon from having a gun how?
next you want to teach the world to sing....in perfect harmony.... and the lion will lay down with the lamb etcetera, etcetera, ecetera. Where is this supposed euphoric world? What galaxy?
dirp, Since the purpose of such a tax would be ONLY to circumvent the constitutionally protected right to bear arms it would NOT be found constitutional even by the jackasses currently sitting on the Supreme Court.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal said it best!
“I spent a career carrying typically either an M16 or an M4 Carbine. An M4 Carbine fires a .223 caliber round which is 5.56 mm at about 3000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed for that,” McChrystal explained. “That’s what our soldiers ought to carry. I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America.”
General McChrystal, the overwhelming majority of police officers, and now the governor of New York know better than the NRA about how crazy assault weapons are. Those of you who oppose sensible gun laws to keep these weapons away from the nuts and from harming our children ought to be ashamed of yourselves. The top leadership of the NRA are simply cowards.
Cuomo can have our firearms when he disbands the governorship's armed security detail.
Now only the criminals will have those guns. Chicago & NY have some of the strictest laws, yet their MURDER rate hasn't gone down. I do not oppose every gun needs to be registered and careful screening needs to be enforced but what the media doesn't hit home is the Newton shooting took place with the shooter having access to HIS MOTHERS guns -- they weren't his. Thus registering and screening didn't work in that case.
Uh, actually I think New York's did go down. But you are right, Chicago's went up. This data then shows that the gun laws were not the contributing factor, rather something else. I don't own a gun, never have and never have even held one, but the confiscation idea really is troubling.
Be careful "Dotties girl"! These loony liberals do not want something like "facts" to get in the way of their arguement...
If the govt is concerned about it's citizens' well being, why aren't they enforcing immigration laws? Illegal immigrants kill far more American citizens then assault rifles do.
The only time our govt checks out an illegal is AFTER the illegal harms or kills an American.
"Any gun policy that doesn’t ban assault weapons ignores the reality of gun violence and insults the common sense of New Yorkers,” spokesman Josh Vlasto said"
Apparently this fellow ignores the reality of the FBI's own statistics. Don't trust me to say it. Google the FBI's website and look for Table 20.
People were murdered by knives and sharp objects to Rifles (which include "Assault Guns" 5:1 according to the FBI. The ridiculously low number killed by rifles compared to , well, just about every other method used, does not justify a ban on these rifles compared to the hundreds of thousands that are legally owned now and NOT used for crime.
If you consider guns "evil" then nothing anyone can say will change your mind. But if you are still figuring out what all h fuss is about, please go look at the FBI site yourself so you can get the real numbers and decide for yourself.
Good point "Jim". But I seriously doubt that any of our "left leaning" brethern will do such a thing. They have collectively made up their minds, as evidenced by Cuomo, and will simply thrust their fingers in their ears to deafen the sound of truth.
Chip chip chip it away....
The only thing I agreed with him is a stricter background check for mental health issues and stronger penalties for illegal holders. Everything else I did not.
The ban of the pre-ban mags now..ok so how many gun owners have a .22 Rim Fire or a Pistol with more than 10 now? Since he is issuing a Ban on Assaults Weapons (As NY Already Does) I am guessing he is referring to Semi-Auto AR-15 & AK-47 Rifles. If they are banned, then the pre-bans of the 30 rounds won't even matter. So does this mean those you have guarding our Nuke Plants are now only able to have Pistols with 10 rounds? They can't have Class 3 Full Auto's now as it is..They use semi auto AR's.
Background Check for ALL Ammo? banning of ammo from internet sales? Ummm yea this isn't going to fly well. So someone legal is getting a background check every time they buy rounds. FBI sure going to have hands full during hunting season if it goes through. Also this will now create a HUGE black market for ammo. I am sure there are more details around it but who is to say go out of state to buy? How about re-loaders? By definition they aren't consider Ammo..they are just parts. This will be no different than one going to PA to buy fireworks as they are banned in NY.
What happens if one doesn't re-register? Are the authorities going to be knocking at the door? Uhhh are they now going to be fined right away? How does that even work?
Chip chip chip it away...little by little...
First: A comment from someone who is physically challenged:
"You know what? No. I can't fire a Glock, I have bad wrists from carpal tunnel syndrome. And the recoil and weight of a 12-gauge makes it unmanageable for my feeble frame. But an AR15 is light and has a low recoil, and the shoulder stock eases the wrist issue. It works perfectly for me.
See, you can talk off the top of your head, but you can't imagine every situation. Which is why you have no right to restrict what others choose to own."
http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495
June 29, 2010
"Investigators: 15-year-old son of deputy shoots burglary suspect........The 15-year-old boy and his 12-year-old sister had been home alone in the Mount Royal Village subdivision when around 2:30 p.m. a pair of burglars tried the front and back doors, then broke a back window. The teenager grabbed his father's ASSAULT RIFLE and knew what to do with it. "We don't try to hide things from our children in law enforcement," Lt. Jeffrey Stauber said. "That young boy was protecting his sister. He was in fear for his life and her life." ........The home invaders fled, leaving a trail of blood."
http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Burglary-suspect-shot-by-15-year-old-son-of-deputy-97430719.html
This type of rifle is especially good for those who are physically challenged. Why? the low recoil and accuracy.
“If I could of gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban picking up everyone one of them. Mr. Mrs. America turn them all in. I would of done it. I could not do that. The votes were not here. COMPARE THE ABOVE STATEMENT TO ANY RECENT STATEMENTS LIKE THE ONE's IN THE VIDEO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DKuN2ey80
2009
2011
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11
The true agenda is in FACT Confiscation of firearms not regulation.
The N R A
brought
this on
themselves
by being
flippant
irresponsible
belligerent
obstinate
arrogant
foolish
and
having Wayne LaPierre and Alex Jones as their "voices of reason"
.
.
Registered guns should be re-registered every year...to check for a criminal record.
Look it up....because the NRA advises AGAINST locking up your weapons in your home.
RUBBER BULLETS for target practice... and limited powder clips.
BAN A HIGH CAPACITY gun... they are USELESS for self defense and hunting. They have
ONE PURPOSE:
MURDER
"any legislation restricting the sale and ownership of semi-automatic firearms “a clear violation of our rights as a free people.”" Let's ask the twenty 6-7 year olds in Newtown? Oh, wait, I forgot, they are dead. Are dead people "free people"?
Comparing deaths by motor vehicles and deaths by guns is nonsensical. Apples and oranges. But gun nuts are not logical.
This just in, Cuomo win the biggest "TOOL" award for not using his brain and not being able to think logically.
Hello RI, Alex is merely alerting the bureaucrats what they are in for if they try to circumvent our constitution. The fact of the matter is that we are a violent nation and our government is setting the example. We have been a country for 236 years and we have bombed over 65 countries and have been at war for 217 of those years. As sad as it is those are the facts! Wishing it aint so doesn't make it that way.
If it makes you feel any better our violent crime is improving and better then Piers Morgan's country.
According to FBI.gov statistics not those from a lobbying group who advocate policy.
Since 1992 Violent crime is down 50% the Murder rate is down 54%.
Violent crime rate - In 1992 = 757 per 100,000, Murder rate of 9.3 per 100,000.
Let's see which direction we're going in!
Violent crime rate - In 2011 = 386 per 100,000 a 50% reduction.
Murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000 a 54% reduction.
Why isn't the Media reporting the considerable improvement in violent crime?
The key to improving these numbers further is to isolate where the violent crime is being committed.
In Metropolitan US areas where the population is more than 250,000 the violent crime rate is double. The murder rate is double the national average. You can dissect the information down to the neighborhoods. In other words if our government wants to target violent crime and murder they know exactly where the majority of the violent crime is occurring. Instead of spreading fear, they can put action plans into place to reduce violent crime.
According to the Home Office Statistical Bulletin (England's and Wales version of the FBI) where gun ownership is tightly controlled by law, have put out the enclosed statistics.
England and Wales population is 56 million.
Violent crime = 762,515
Violent crime ratio per 100,000 = 1,361. This is 3 and half times that of the US. Therefore, fewer guns don't equal less violent crime.
In the US we have 186 metropolitan areas with a population of 250K and England has 32 metropolitan areas with 250K. We have 6 times more metropolitan areas then England and less violent crime.
In 2011 of all the homicides committed by firearms, only 3.5% were committed with rifles and the AR15 is only a subset of the rifle group.
We know where the violent crime is being committed and it is in the urban impoverished areas. If we truly want to address the violent crime issues we need to go into these areas and provide more jobs and a better educational system.
I personally believe that we all should have a fighting chance to defend our loved ones in a country that has proven itself to be a warmongering nation.
One thing which can always be counted upon is that extremists will go too far, and shock the senses of the more rational.
The always comforting certainty about the pro-guns vs. anti-guns debate is that the more extreme voices on the pro-guns side of the debate can always be counted on to present ever more extreme rhetoric, eventually including threats of violence if anyone tries to take their guns away.
The extremist rhetoric inevitably morphs into anti-government rants, warnings about our own government becoming totalitarian and the need therefore to arm the citizens to fight our own government and military.
In essence, the extremist pro-gun voices are the fuel which will power the more moderate voices on both sides of the debate to "do something" about the problem; to find rational solutions.
The moderate voices on the pro-gun side of the debate are just as fearful of the extremists in our midst, and the extreme rhetoric, as the rest of us. And that common ground will sway the debate, and will win the day.
Hello Doug, where was your voice denouncing all the murders we perpetrate on other countries and where are the progressives regarding the hundreds of thousands of children killed by our country in our name?
Consider the Sandy Hook school shooting. This shooting serves as an excuse for anti gun lobbyists to express their hatred of guns and the NRA and to advance their gun control agenda. Few if any of those hyperventilating over the tragedy know any of the parents of the murdered children. They have shown no similar response to the US government’s murder of countless thousands of Muslim children. The Clinton regime alone killed 500,000 Iraqi children with illegal sanctions, and Clinton’s immoral secretary of state Madeleine Albright, a feminist hero, said that she thought the sanctions were worth the cost of one half million dead Iraqi children. The Bush regime is just as guilty!
Suddenly, 20 US children become of massive importance to “progressives.” Why? Because the deaths foster their agenda–gun control in the US.
When I hear people talk about “gun violence,” I wonder what has happened to language. A gun is an inanimate object. An inanimate object cannot cause violence. Humans cause violence. The relevant question is: why do humans cause violence? This obvious question seldom gets asked. Instead, inanimate objects are blamed for the actions of humans.
Wow, the very next post (#1.23). See what I mean?
@Robert in Oregon, well Robert, where are your crocodile tears for the children we have killed through sanctions, drone strikes, or outright combat? I already asked once! That is what I thought. A complete and utter hypocrite!
The only thing any of these articles and discussion forums show is the intelligence and cluelessness of the people in them. There are more important things to take care of in this country and this sensless debate is keeping those things from being taken care of. A horrible crime was committed by a deranged little man and no amount of gun control or even a ban would have stopped it. Parenting would have been a start. This country is being destroyed economically, morally, and has a crumbling infrastructure. We are sitting here debating and ranting about how banning a law abiding citizens right to own weapons would have prevented a criminal from killing. How can you people not see the truth in any of this?
Well said gunner.
Why is it that people like RI Mom hate the US? They want to put permanant restrictions on the rights our Founding Fathers gave us... just because THEY are afraid. Sorry, sweetheart, but a hunting rifle was NOT the idea when the FF's make the 2nd Amendment. There will come a time, and I really feel it is a time coming soon, that each and every US citizen will need to have a military style weapon to keep their family and communtiy safe. With the way that racist in the White House is running this Country into the ground, civil war is close at hand.
BOTTOM LINE: GOVERNMENT @!$%#S<ITS NOT UP TO YOU, YOU WORK FOR US AND IF YOU WANT MY GUNS THEN YOU ARE FIRED!!! And any little pussy who wants to sign their rights away and make YOU in charge instead of US can go with you to wherever ISNT the USA.
good post gunner. for those that are interested look up crime stats for kenesaw georgia. every homeowner, except mentally ill or felons, is required to own a firearm. be sure to note the murder rate....ZERO!!!!!!!
now thats what i call gun control!
Cuomo, like Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Charles Schummer, Rahm Emanuel, and much of the liberal left are nothing more than participatory facists whose aim has nothing to do with making the country safer and EVERYTHING to do with forcing their will upon those that demand their Constitutional rights be acknowledged. For those that think gun control has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment, you are ignorant of the philosophy of the founding fathers of this nation. You are also ignorant of the millions of people that own guns, and the millions of people that took oaths to defend this nation against all enemies FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC who would negate or destroy what the Constitition protects. This is no game, and creeps like Cuomo who would deny his State's citizens their rights to enhance his political aspirations deserve to be thrown out of office like chaff to the wind. People like him are more dangerous to the freedom in this country than Al Qaida or Hitler. If this political insanity continues, the results may be far different than Cuomo might imagine! The last time the liberals tried this crap they were all thrown out of office - get ready for a repeat and a possible impeachment!
The debate is not about gun control, it is about control. Just like the Affordable Health Care ACT was not about making Health Care more Affordable, it was about control.
If an idiot member of congress (many come to mind but I am referring to Ms. Feinstein) can introduce a bill that congress passes and the president signs into law that amends the Constitution, then we no longer have a constitution.
The 2nd amendment states our right to bare arms. Not the right to bare certain arms, or the right to bare approved arms, or anything else. It says we as a nation of free citizens have the right to bare arms.
I don't really care which side of the debate you are on as to banning a type of gun. If you are an American, and if you value your freedom, then you better be against Feinstein and the rest of the usual anti-constitution crowd trying to change the constitution with a bill.
If they can change the 2nd amendment with a bill, then they can change the first or 3rd or 4th, or 5th, etc, We may wake up one day and have the first amendment say we have the right to the freedom of assembly, but a bill says only in Disneyland at 3:00 am on the third Tuesday of March in odd years. Or we have the right to freedom of speech, but can no longer criticize the president, congress, or the federal reserve.
To take over a government, it is well established that all you have to do is take over education, banking, health care, and regulate the economy into oblivion. We have already done all the above. The last stage is always take away the guns. Citizens have guns, subjects do not. The other notion that is also absurd is the notion that somehow the 2nd Amendment is about deer hunting. It isn't. the 2nd amendment is about killing people on the wrong wide of protecting the constitution and alwasy has been, so any imposed limitations that only deer rifles are allowed simply makes a mockery of the 2nd amendment.
So if the government wants to ban a gun, and again, I don't give a rat's ass which side of the debate you are on, then simply insist that the government follow the constitution and amend the 2nd amendment and ban anything you want to ban. All else is illegal and places whoever ever does so, or tries to do so, above the law effectively ending the Republic and making themselves enemies of the constitution.
Everyone that has ever served in uniform has taken an oath to the grave, that they will protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Ms. Feinstein, you are an idiot and you are playing with fire. Be very careful or you could be the one that lights a very short fuse to a very explosive situation. I for one hope cooler and more intelligent heads prevail and the constitution is upheld. That is our rule of law. That is our republic. That is what our flag stands for. If you don't like it, then leave.
Trust, "hundreds of thousands of children killed by our country in our name?" Where did you get that "statistic?"
RobertinOregon - I disagree with just about everything you state, which is the usual factifuging garbage liberals use to vilify or attack anyone that doesn't agree with their agenda. If supporting the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights is being extreme - then I and about 150 million Americans are extremist. If resisting a left wing agenda that is nothing more than a political move at the expense of common sense and constitutional rights is being an extremist - then I'm an extremist. If taking an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC make a person an extremist, than I, along with the US Military, are ALL extremists. In actuality, the ONLY extremists are people that believe as you do, and eventually the 180 million Americans that own the 310 million firearms in this nation are going to have enough..
Dotties girl...
Minor correction, chicago gun deaths have gone up and NYC's gun deaths have gone down in 2012
note leftist liberal boneheads:
MORE murders are commited EACH YEAR with hammers and clubs than are commited with ALL types of rifles combined
hmmm...interesting
and this psyco lefty dumbazz Cuomo can kiss the collective azzes of the rest of us , he would do better to get to cleaning up the CESSPOOL that is the ENTIRE state of New York , another boil on the azz of America
Wow and it begins with a LUNATIC.... A LEFT WING LIBERAL lunatic no less, trying to push his morals onto the rest of the nation. He likely wants to legalize weed and ban guns... they can't figure out if they are coming or going. Liberal on one thing and communist on another. Try and confiscate guns and it will not end up good for politicians who are on that side of the argument, you will be out of office quickly, about next election which is likely four years too late already. There is an entire nation outside of the gang banging cities and it is a 10 million to one ratio of legal law abiding citizens who have guns they want to have because they can have. Try a ban and you will make millions of criminals instantly. Americans will not give up their guns to a government... I think the British tried that here just a short while back in our history. NOT GONNA HAPPEN CUOMO, keep your communism in your own F$*king state. Do you think your gangs are going to obey your laws and give up their guns? Are you going to have an officer posted outside my house and by my person at all times to protect me like you have protecting you? No your not you hypocrite. All this from a soft drink size limit community... go figure, who is on the fringe here... look in the mirror Cuomo
If firearms are outlawed - I WILL NOT give mine up or turn them in, period. Like the saying goes "I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
RI Mom - what is a powder clip? If you are going to advocate banning or outlawing a tool - do everyone the courtesy and learn and know what you are talking about.
Hello tiredofhypocrites, take a look at this Youtube video where Madeline Albright states she thinks the price of half a million children killed in Iraq due to the sanctions the US imposed was worth it. This doesn't even take into account children that have been killed in other conflicts through sanctions, drone strikes or combat related fatalities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8
Quite frankly they don't come anymore ignorant than those who think a ban is the direction to go. Live in your city bubble and push your edicts on to everyone else because you don't understand any other way of life. This use to be America. Cuomo (oh great one) exactly how many pieces of toilet paper may we use before we are convicted of something? Our politicians are out of control... and we have nobody to blame other than the voters who cast for them and the media for twisting and blowing things out of proportion. They simply don't have the wherewithall to figure out a solution to anything other than more taxes and more laws. They seem to have forgotten who they work for and quite frankly don't even care. As long as they have their golden parachutes and cushy jobs with personal body guards us peasants should just go along with the program.
Wow and all these words by the guy who damn near brought the US government down with his wacky liberal mandates while at HUD. No wonder why he wants the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.
We can't get the guns out of the hands of criminal, thugs and gang members. Now we have to believe that the government can't ALWAYS protect you. So disarming you makes it safer for whom?
Is there any way that we can recall the governor in NY State?
What is going to happen if a crazy man gets into a school and slashes the throats of children? You just know that's going to happen next. Slashing of throats is instant death and he will be able to do it to many rather quickly.
What Piers Morgan needs to know is that yes, gun deaths have gone down in England but violent deaths by other means have gone up.
When Cuomo gets rid of his guns at his home, when his bodyguards at home & work and his family's bodyguards get rid of their guns, and when gun carrying guards are removed from his family's schools then I will get rid of mine.
Oh wait, he is not my governor. Never mine.
John Athandoe
in 2011 there were 14,748 murders in the US. 8,775 by guns. Therefore your statement is untrue. (Do the math)
In England with roughly 1/6 our population there were 638 murders and 58 by guns.
Therefore if we take the US non-gun murder rate and scale for England.s population we get somewhat less than 1000 murders. A bit more, but comparable to England. If we scale the gun murder rate, we get just under 1,500 gun murders as compared to 58. Not comparable at all.
Sorry NRA types, your arguments are dead wrong. These are facts!
Ferrosnthsomething
"in 2011 there were 14,748 murders in the US. 8,775 by guns. Therefore your statement is untrue."
hmmm...where to begin...oh, it's simple
the subject of the conversation is banning some forms of "RIFLES" , not "HANDGUNS"............yet
ergo the statistics that I listed are in fact accurate , and on point and relative to the conversation of whether or not we should ban possession of certain types of rifles because of how "deadly" they are, or "their necessity" .
the lefty kool aid is most dangerous because of the Alinsky side effect of "always change the issue"
Sorry Ferro but England never had guns in the hands of gangs the size of those in the US. Do a little math that counts, what percentage of deaths were by legally owned guns in the US vs. those that were stolen or done so by gangs and previously known criminals. Guns will never be confiscated and thugs will always have one whether they are banned or not. Quite simply this type of law will never make a difference in your lifetime or mine. In fact it will just switch to another and then another and yet another law because the prior ones didn't work. Laws are made to be broken and criminals will always do so, yet you seek to punish law abiding citizens thinking your affecting criminals. And when do the broken laws come off the books? Never.... Move to Russia that is more like the system you have in mind for your life. My forefathers came here for very different reasons than you have in mind. I think I like the reasons this country was founded upon not what you and your communist cronies wish to twist it into.
just going back to 2005 the statistics average around 450 murders by "rifle" and 650 for murder by "hammers and clubs"...you are about 33% more likely to get your head bashed in by a psyco than get shot with a psyco's rifle...ouch
better get to banning those assault hammers and assault clubs
Ever since the tragedy at Sandy Hook, the posts on these forums has shown one blazing fact.
Those who want to institute ANY kind of ban AND/OR registration, (not the REQUIRED background checks, that DO occur at gun shows, too. {ie - Loophole MYTH}), bring ABSOLUTELY NO LEGITIMATE FACTS to the table for RATIONAL discussion. And what "facts" they do bring are rarely from respected sources such as the CDC, FBI, UN, et al. They flippantly twist numbers and resort to MYTHS that have been debunked REPEATEDLY by numerous government agencies AND the UN! They base their decisions on "feelings" of what THEY want, and be damned if you stand in their way! They claim that the Constitution is outdated and that we need to git rid of it, thus revealing their true hatred for this country, and their desire to turn us into some Euro-Freak nation. {If you like them so much, move there.}
While those that wish to maintain FREEDOM in this country, show the very facts, stats, court decisions and laws ALREADY ON THE BOOKS that these "banners" despise. These freedom lovers only wish to live in peace, and to be able to defend both their families AND THEIR COUNTRY, WHENEVER NEEDED. {Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and NOT have it!} And they do so with the understanding that not everyone wants to own, have, possess or use a firearm... And they are fine with that!
Now apply the "banners" thinking to other things like...
Disease. Famine. Bicycles. Walking. Sports. Eating. LIVING!
Now we can see how foolish the banning argument really sounds.
"But the gun is designed to kill." SO WHAT?!
Look at how many people driving around act like they got their license out of a Crackerjack box! Hey! Lets blame the CAR and not the DRUNK who got behind the wheel! Dumbass...
Lets make Heart Disease and Cancer "illegal" and see if it goes away. D'oh!
"Designed to kill" is just another piss-poor, weaker-than-water argument by a bunch of delusional, self-absorbed idealists who somehow believe they can make some kind of Utopia to materialize by FORCING everyone else to behave and think like they do! Ain't happenin'! If the importance of "one life" really meant anything to them, they would all rally against abortion. But that's not convenient...
"But gun crime is significantly lower in Europe..." Damned right! But then again, ALL other VIOLENT CRIME has gone THROUGH THE STINKING ROOF! {And that's, the rest of the story...} And if you're the victim, you're screwed! Six of one, and half dozen of the other! Like I said, SO WHAT?! "Criminals" don't follow/abide by the law. That's why they're called CRIMINALS!
The Founders were NOT stupid. They were "Futurists"; forward thinkers who KNEW that things would progress in EVERY area. And they wanted to have a way for the People to have an active part in the safety, security and DEFENSE of this country. Hence the Citizen Militia. If they truly loved this country, you would RESPECT the wishes of the individuals who CHOOSE to possess arms, (just as those who CHOOSE not to possess them wish to be respected), AND focus on the ACTUAL cause of these problems.... Bad and/or Broken people.
If you don't want to own gun(S), Tanks {Arnold Schwarzenegger takes his own personal tank out for a spin}, Cannons, etc.... No problem! No skin off my ass. Enjoy your life. Live in peace. Carpe Diem. Party on, dude!
No one is going to force them on you... I'm a peace loving guy and can live with that.
But if you TRY to take what I CHOOSE to have... Grab your F-ing ankles! You'll get them, lead first...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW - I have NEVER belonged to, nor currently plan on joining, the NRA.
Aside from Cuomo's blatantly unconstitutional rhetoric, is Andy going to celebrate "Gun Appreciation Day" currently scheduled for January 19th?
He's just getting on board with the socialistic gun grabbing agenda that regularly uses shooting incidents as cover for their true agenda.
Want proof? Examine any anti-gun proposal they finally put out and you will see it impacts only the 99.9% of law abiding gun owners while doing nothing to prevent that which they are using as justification for their actions and certainly won't impact criminals at all.
There is a huge difference between making the world safer and penalizing law abiding citizens for having diferent interests then you do. So in the name of "safer" we are going to propose that law abiding citizens can't have any modern firearms because they: Are semi-automatic (fire one round per pull of the trigger), they can hold more than 5 rounds, they are accurate, AND they look menacing. Brilliant folks, just brilliant.
This is the same hogwash that is used for environmentalism- to a point. We can't use oil, it's evil...... no exploration, no refining, etc. however we won't go after you if you want to own six vnitage cars, a bus, a Hummer, and a truck. Many of those are getting under 20 miles per gallon and do bigtime environmental damage, but that's ok- it's your right to enjoy your cars.
Like I said before, the crux of this discussion (if you even want to call it a discussion- more like a witch hunt) is that there is a portion of our population that don't like guns and don't want any civilian owning one. Maybe they are internationalists, maybe they are afraid, maybe it's their political party view, whatever- they are perfectly willing to demonize anyone owning a gun legally, vilify the law abiding gun industry, and perfectly willing to overlook any other factors that might insight violence in our society. Take Piers Morgan for example- he's parading people on his show just to call them idiots- great dialog there Piers. If I'm not mistaken he's a Brit and he's been implicated in that little Brittish media phone tapping scandal where it was ok (highly illegal) for the Brit media to invade your privacy for a story. Now he's here, can't legally own a gun, and wants to have them all taken away from you. Funny how that works- he gets you on his show, let's you provide an FBI statistic on violence and then tells you that you are an imbicile and assbackwards. So far as I'm concerned, if Mr. Morgan doesn't want a real dialog then he's not worth watching.
Mr. Morgan, how about dealing with mental illness in society? How about our prescription drug culture and it's effects on the young (and the old)? How about the hardening of our culture (when the most popular movies are about a guy killing with a chainsaw, some gangsters killing peopel and enforcing their illegal actions, and a guy killing out of vengence)- nah, that couldn't have anything to do with why people are violent. How about the massive drop in gun violence, the drop in murders, etc. other then in the largest cities (most of whom have the tightest gun restrictions in the country)? How about our no snitchin' culture? How about our pimpin', hustlin', no two parentt family culture rapt with baby mommas and no fathers around?? How about clueless politicians whom rape the people's coffers to enhance thier power and line their pockets? I can go on and on.
I'd happily take a gun culture if it comes with personal responsibility and fair governance. Right now all we are getting is "government is best" and the shaft.
First there was the ban on the size of carbonated drinks the People of NY could purchase. Now, there is this? It won't stop until every right that We The People have has been tampered with. WTF!
@ RI Mom; either figure out what the hell you are talking about, or stop posting.
Thank goodness politicians are finally talking about reasonable gun laws.
About time.
At least the NRA cannot bully us anymore.
Silverton what exactly are reasonable laws... you mean the ones on the books that our bloated government doesn't act on? Or easy ones that are black and white they can use to jail anyone at anytime on.I don't think the NRA does anything any different than your liberal lobbyists do in bribing politicians for their cause, this one just doesn't agree with your misunderstanding about what will and will not work. Did this kid get his gun lawfully? Do gangs and murderers get their guns legally and furthermore do they care about a gun law when they are going to commit the biggest crime possible? Have a clue please.... short of seizure of all guns and that isn't going to happen, ever... you quite simply are only affecting law abiding citizens.. all in the sake of forcing people to your way of thinking... Ahhh the America we all grew up with or came here to love right? Friggin idiots. The expression on your beloved Cuomo's face in the photo at the top of the page shows more agression than 90% of gunowners would ever show and he has his little body guards packing heat to back up his I dare you defy me blather... Talk about trying to intimidate, left wing communism. Think like we do or else eh..
Hello silverton, how about a gentleman's bet? I know that there will be a lot of bluster from the Administration but I'll bet you that after the dust settles from what is proposed to what actually gets instituted, will not change a persons ability to get any size of magazine they want along side the AR15. Hell, Walmart will probably have a buy one get one free sale!
Is it a bet?
I'll tell you what, I'll let you give peace a chance but I'll cover you with my 2nd Amendment in case it doesn't work out!
The True Patriots know this isn't just about gun control, it's about neutering the population so that they can put everyone on their knees. We won't let that happen!
Better start stockpiling now, TrustVerify.
New gun laws are coming and Big Brother will be watching you. LOL
:)
BTW - Here's an interesting tidbit STRAIGHT FROM THE BRADY CAMPAIGN'S OWN WEBSITE!
Take a look at the state's with the highest "Brady Score", {the most gun control laws}, and they are the States with the highest gun crime! And the ones with the lowest "Score", {gun friendly}, has the least gun crime.
Their own numbers PROVE that gun control DOES NOT WORK.
Disarming the People does NOT protect the People.
If Executive Orders have the same "weight" as law, we ALL MUST consider the following; (Let the reader and the current ACTING President PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE FINAL PARAGRAPH):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be VERY careful, Mr. President. Big Brother may be watching us, but WE are watching you, too!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank goodness new gun laws are coming and the NRA cannot bully us anymore.
Yeah!
Good thing the vast, vast majority of all gun crime/murder in this country involves HANDGUNS!
What an idiot. What a waste of time.
Stockpiling has been going on for years (and so what if it is) and sportsmen have a large amount of money tied up in their invesments which is why the government will never steal them back from us in a forfeit... what a liberal fascist money grab attempt at a group... you lefties should be screaming discrimination. The media crows about someone who did something wrong having a thousand rounds of ammo... lol what a joke that's nothing.. Any red blooded real american has thousands of rounds... for each caliber they own, you go target shooting and can use up a few hundred on a given afternoon easily so if a thousand rounds is a lot someone doesn't know their azzz from a hole in the ground. Maybe you should be worrying about them watching you Silverton.... dealing drugs isn't quite legal yet. last I checked owning guns and ammo was so if they are watching law abiding citizens it is a good example of an over bloated government, this should concern you. Maybe if they focused on troubled kids and mental health and enforced the laws on the books this wouldn't happen, instead they pass the buck and try and make more laws they can't possibly understand.
Sounds like you have quite an arsenal.
Bet you are stocked up on Bucksnort coffee and deer jerky too.
Guess you will be ready when the Big Bad Government Man comes to get you.
LOL
How about some more FACTS regarding the misnomer of "REGISTRATION"?
The federal level:
The State level:
Handgun: The Peoples Republic of California, DC, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Washington (Partial)
Long gun: DC, Hawaii
States with so-called Assault Rifle Laws: The Peoples Republic of California, Connecticut, DC, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Virginia
NOTE: Some States allow for municipalities to have stricter laws than what is at the State level. For detail, you can go here: OpenCarry.org or here: Gun laws in the United States by state
You forgot this one:
Virginia -
Any person who is mentally insane can walk into a gun show and buy an assault weapon with a magazine clip and go home with it that day without having a background check.
I love the blithering idiots that complain about the NRA, even though they are the largest gun safety and training entity in the country. This legislation is nothing more than a feel-good package that will again, do nothing to solve the problem. Perhaps if any of the anti-gun people actually used... scratch that... KNEW anything about firearms in the first place, they'd have an argument that pro-gun people would listen to. In the past few weeks, I've heard AR-15's described as assault weapons (and on occasion they have been called AK-47's and AK-15's). Do your homework. At least know what you're trying to ban. Then, you'll see how sill your arguments are.
JP-345944 Ignoring author
Wow, what a terrific rant. You could not have done a better job illustrating and reinforcing the points of my original post if you had tried. Thank you for the favor!
I sincerely hope that you will keep it up, and will continue to use and display EXACTLY this sort of rhetoric, because your own rhetoric and manner of communication is doing so much more to undermine your own "guns before logic; guns before everything" position than anything which can be offered by those arguing with more moderate voices for some sensible, rational gun-control measures.
And just as I stated in my post, people of your mindset will ALWAYS in the end threaten violence, ....just as you did in your last sentence above. You are as deep as a rain puddle. You just make this SO-O-O-O-O-O easy! :-)
And it's always amusing to watch (and chuckle), as those of your mindset immediately label ANYONE with a differing point of view from your own a "left wing" "liberal" (I am neither) or a Dem (I am not) ....etc., etc ad nauseam. You have just one, blanket label for everyone else (all of those who you deem to be unenlightened; one label fits all).
And what is especially amusing - as you have ably illustrated in your post above - is when those of your mindset bemoan in varying language the "usual factifuging garbage liberals use to vilify or attack anyone that doesn't agree with their agenda" ... by using that exact modus operandi; entirely missing the blatant irony! "Pot, meet kettle."
Don't you ever take a moment for personal reflection on your own rhetoric, to see how you may be undermining your own points?
The late, great Conservative author and thinker William F. Buckley once cautioned those on the fringes and extremes of the Conservative movement in America:
Cheers! Please don't stop ranting, you're doing our work for us.
Spiddas wrote:
And thanks to your own words, the U.S. Secret Service will now be watching you!
They take that sort of rhetoric very seriously.
(Hint: Best not answer the next knock on your door with one of your guns in your hand).
Silverton:
Uh, yeah... All retail purchases MUST, by law, be run through NCIS background checks. No exceptions. And as far as the "private" sales go; I've never seen anyone sell anything to someone else at a gun show without some kind of ID checking. Thank you for proving the point being made by the pro-gun/pro-USA groups. It's not the gun, it's the mentally ill that need dealt with. I personally knew someone who WAS a certified mental case. For the most part, he was as normal as normal could be... Especially in front of a judge.
BTW - A magazine and a clip are two different animals.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bobby! Nice out of context job.
And the last paragraph was actually:
And the kicker is, the President and S.S. know this. He also knows all eyes from both sides are on him, and that the People at large will hold him accountable for any errant decision. And he's definitely getting an earful regarding what he can do via his advisors... Constitutionally speaking, he knows he is in a spot where he doesn't have much, if any, wiggle room. He MUST follow the law, and he knows it. Otherwise, the People, through their representatives and senators, will be crawling up his ass. Anyone who thinks these past few Presidents are dumb, doesn't know Jack!
Besides, the S.S. would get re-e-e-eal bored watching me. They have much better things to do than monitor a law abiding citizen. And since I have nothing to fear, I don't answer the door with a gun in hand. Never have. Seriously, you watch too much TV... Nice try.
Magazines,clips automatic,semi-automatic,assault,handguns,Ban them.
NO rational person can accept the NRA defiant stance on guns... because they clearly are against SAFETY.
"Microstamping" and "Encoded Ammunition"—NRA opposes requiring that cartridge cases be marked with serial numbers and registered to gun owners.
Mandatory Storage—NRA opposes requiring gun owners to lock all guns when at home, because locked guns cannot be used for self-defense and such a law would be enforceable only by home inspections by the police.
Protecting FFLs—NRA supports a law to prevent BATFE from revoking firearms dealers' licenses for insignificant technical violations.
Terrorist Watchlist—NRA opposes legislation to prohibit the possession of firearms by people on the watchlist, because the FBI will not say who is on the list or why, and the legislation would violate the 5th Amendment by preventing a watchlisted person from challenging the FBI in a fair and open hearing in court.
"Smart" Guns—NRA opposes requiring that guns have expensive, unreliable features, such as grips that would read your fingerprints before the gun will fire. D.C.
More Guns, Less "Gun Control," and Less Crime There are more guns and gun owners in the U.S. than ever.
During the last decade, "gun control" has been significantly reduced.
The federal waiting period on handguns ended in 1998, in favor of the NRA-supported national instant check.
Congress refused to renew the federal "assault weapon" and "large" magazine ban, allowing it to expire in 2004.
Congress and 33 states have prohibited frivolous lawsuits against the firearms industry.
Forty-two states have Right-to-Carry, and 48 states prohibit cities from imposing gun laws more restrictive than state law.
.
.
.
I found this posted on the internet:
Source:
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/fact-sheets/2012/nra-ila-firearms-fact-card-2012.aspx?s=firearms+fact+card&st=&ps
The N R A
brought
this on
themselves
by being
flippant
irresponsible
belligerent
obstinate
arrogant
foolish
and
having Wayne LaPierre and Alex Jones as their "voices of reason"
.
.
Registered guns should be re-registered every year...to check for a criminal record.
Look it up....because the NRA advises AGAINST locking up your weapons in your home.
RUBBER BULLETS for target practice... and limited powder clips.
BAN A HIGH CAPACITY gun... they are USELESS for self defense and hunting. They have
ONE PURPOSE:
MURDER
In Virginina, a State that has some of the most lax gun laws in the country, a mentally insane person can walk into a gun show and walk out with an assault weapon the same day with no background check. As long as you have the cash, you're good!
But then again, the NRA commandant, Wayne LaPierre, is from Roanoke, Virginia, so that probably explains it.
Hello silverton and RI Mom, we will let you two be the first to say that it is ok to microstamp and encode our children.
In San Antonio, Texas the Northside Independent School District is now experimenting with “locator” chips in student ID badges on two campuses, allowing administrators to track the whereabouts of 4,200 students with GPS-like precision. If you don’t believe me look it up!
Administrators say the chips make students safer and will help boost attendance records that are used to calculate badly needed state funding.
A student, Hernandez, has filed a law suit against Northside – the fourth-largest school district in Texas – argues that the ID rule violates her religious beliefs. Her family says the badge is a “mark of the beast” that goes against their religion. As a result of her refusal, the school is transferring her which will put an undue hardship on her and her family. This also sends a clear message to anyone who doesn't conform to this civil liberties violation.
But U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia on Tuesday denied a request to stop her from being transferred, saying the badge requirement “has an incidental effect, if any, on (Hernandez’s) religious beliefs.”
How about an Orwellian affect you SOB!
It is starting folks, first a GPS chip in your ID then a RFID chip under your skin. I’m just waiting to hear the sheeple say, IT’S FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY. The sheeple will fall to their knees in support and call anybody a tinfoil paranoid schizophrenic who doesn’t allow this to happen to their child. Let’s see how the propaganda disinformation trolls spin this one!
Those that have the intestinal fortitude to see what is happening knows why it is so important that we not allow our government to tamper with our 2nd Amendment rights. The evidence doesn’t get any clearer.
Americans Hate Obama
Where do you live?
If crime is a problem...how is your anti-vigilant campaign working for you?
Maybe you should join the police force and do something positive...... would you pass the MENTAL TEST?
I'm guessing all your RACIST COMMENTS on the Vine would identify you as a dangerous, crazed bigot.
Americans Hate Obama you said:
"Americans are DEMANDING the elimination of all vehicles that can hold more than 6 illegals. They want background checks on all non-English speaking drivers."
Well then you agree with Arizona's SB1070 law that gives state troopers the right check people's papers to assure they aren't illegal immigrants.
I'll tell you what I'll go one up on you. I think it's a law that should be enacted through out our entire country.
But in order for it to be moral and legal, it can only be enforced by a Native American Indian!
TrustVerify,
You have GOT to get out more and start visiting people in the real world.
It is not healthy to stay inside and watch FOX news and let Rush Limbaugh be your mental guru. This leads to a chronic condition called Delusional Paranoia.
I am not joking. Large doses of propaganda leads to brainwashing.
silverton - when have you personally ever been bullied by the NRA? When has anyone?
RI Mom - all the things that you listed as showing that the NRA is against safety will do nothing for safety. How is microstamping the shell casing or the bullet going to make a gun safer? Most bullets are pretty mangled after they hit something so trying to read the microstamping would make it a little difficult to say the least and all the perp has to do is pick up the shell casings or use someone elses casings at the scene of the crime. Also, that is a technology that doesn't work.
The part about the FFL license is another one. If you make a mistake on the spelling or transpose a phone number should you lose your lively hood because of a few typos? How is penalizing someone for making a mistake going to make guns safer?
I wouldn't want the FBI to tell me I couldn't own a gun because they put me on some list. No Due Process, no trial, no conviction. How would you like it they told you couldn't own a car because you were on a list that does not provide any explanation as to why you were placed on that list? What does the terrorist watchlist have to do with making the US safer from a psycho kid?
As far as the so called "smart guns" go - the technology does not work. Why should I have to pay an extra $1000 for a gun that won't fire when I want it to?
As far as keeping firearms secured - I am all for that. Any responsible gun owner does keep his weapons secure and he/she educates their children on how dangerous they can be. There are laws already on the books that hold gun owners responsible if the guns were NOT secured, get stolen and are used in the commitment of a crime.
So, nothing I can see on your post would actually do anything to make guns safer. These are just "feel good" measures brought forth by politicians who would make you think they are actually doing something.
When a pedophile does something unspeakable to a child, do any of you want to ban children? No, you want to make it tougher for the pedophile to have the opportunity again. So we have sex offender registration and watch lists and so on.
There are plenty of laws on the books that prohibit people from using firearms illegally. Do they work? For the most part yes. However no law will prevent a mentally disturbed person from doing something that is wrong. The very definition of the words "mentally disturbed" should give you a clue.
For decades, the NRA and many of its fanatic supporters have bribed politicians and bullied millions of American citizens who have spoken out in favor of reasonable gun laws.
Whenever anyone has attempted to voice their opinions about implementing rational gun control, they have been shouted down, villified, mocked, threatened, and bullied by the NRA and its hostile followers. This is in violation of our FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH.
Thank goodness the days of the NRA bullying us is over.
(As for your "concern" about mentally ill people doing something wrong, I am from Virginia, and in that State you can be mentally insane and stroll into any gun show, buy an assault weapon, and take it home that day with no background check. Sometimes you might be asked to show a driver's license or some form of identification, but if you have the cash in hand, you can walk out packing!
Hey, anybody think we ought to change that? Or should we just talk about it for a little while until the next massacre?)
Hello Silverton, wow, what a dramatic transformation. You started out as a poster who appeared cool, calm and collected willing to exchange arguments in a rational manner. What happenned, you now sound frantic? Perhaps a person who finally realizes what he is up against. The Constitution carries a lot of weight, power and depth in our consciousness my friend and it will take no more then an act of God to change it.
The bottom line is that the Supreme Court will ultimately determine where this discussion goes, all of our forays, banter and badinage is just that. If you really think they care what we think you are deluding yourself. It's all part of the illusion; distract, divide and conquer, same as its always been. Good luck though, we could use someone like you on the side of civil liberties.
P.S. I despise Fox and Rush by the way!
Glad to hear how you feel about Fox and Rush.
At least we have these opinions in common.
but you love Matthews , Madcow , Kruger , Cooper and CNN and MSNBC.................no accounting for taste..........or flavor of kool aid
Don't watch the first three, but think Anderson Cooper is okay. I like CNN and think msnbc is good. I listen to NPR too but it is leaning a bit too much to the left these days.
Fox and Rush and both propaganda as all of the un-brainwashed crowd knows.
Sooner or later responsible gun owners are going to blame the real douche bags in this which are the NRA and that other right wing gun lobby that are merely front men for the arms industry. Responsible gun laws are not an infringment on ab=nybodies rights pr privileges. They had a chance to come to the table and work with people who are backed by 80-65% of the American people and refused to do so. So now you may end up with laws that do nothing or are too strict because you leaders fell on their swords. In the mean time there may be a silver lining in this cloud. Maybe just maybe people will wake up and take care of their weapons and keep them out of the hands of people who do not know or care about how to handle them. I am an old shooter who used to use mu guns to hunt for food. On an occasion I still do. I have no need for assult weapons as Bambi does not shoot back.
Killing people is legal..... under certain circumstances
Why high capacity clips?
In the event of a catastrophe or civil unrest, your home may come under siege by multiple rioters or looters. A high capacity weapon would be a great asset to protect your family.
I admit it is highly unlikely , but certainly not impossible.
While most of us are willing to bet our lives that such a scenario will ever unfold, millions of people are not, and buy assault weapons.
Do you actually believe that the millions of people who purchased these weapons did so in order to massacre school children?
Get the lunatics off the street to stop the mayhem - of course that is politically incorrect , it's not their fault , it's the gun's fault--- argggghhhh
So the basis of the argument to ban assault weapons is as followsSince it is politically incorrect to screen for and remove lunatics from the general population, we feel that millions of gun owners should give up their right to own guns.
By this logic, you should always carry a parachute. Because you never know when you'll have to leap from an airplane, even if you never fly. You might get abducted. You might be picked up by the government for a top secret mission. Who knows what circumstances get you in the air. But if the @*$^ hits the fan in the air, you can accept you fate and die helplessly like a lamb for the slaughter. OR you can carry a parachute everywhere you go. Because you never know.
why do you people always go to the extreme's when someone makes a comment. That's just ridiculous.
Dotties girl: "why do you people always go to the extreme's when someone makes a comment. That's just ridiculous."
Because there is something palpably wrong with American society that allows a few self-interested folks to manipulate a large majority to want what's injurious to it! You need a national referendum on guns. But the vote would be bought. What a degenerate society that insists on propagating itself to the world!
I'm guessing "pragmatic" doesn't even keep a fire extinguisher or a flashlight in his house. Because, why prepare for anything?
Never say that the unthinkable cannot occur. Most of us could not imagine anyone going into an elementary school and murdering 20 innocent 6 and 7 year olds. How can you say that a person is wrong to prepare to defend themselves and their family from a scenario that you think could not happen? A semi-automatic rifle with a large capacity magazine is absolutely the best tool for defense against a number of attackers.
Even as we speak here there are terrorists plotting to destroy this country. One of the best ways would be to knock out our computers and/or our power grid. Massive civil unrest would result because of the inability to procure food and fuel. Those of us living in rural areas would be targeted as food would quickly disappear in the cities. Why anyone needs an "assault weapon" would become quickly obvious.
Don't think that anything is impossible. Our society could change very rapidly for any number of reasons. Don't be too quick to give up your options. Something that you cannot imagine needing today could be the difference between life and death tomorrow.
assault weapons combined kill less people year after year than hammers and even bare hands. FBI stats.
There is something palpably wrong with American society that allows a few hysterical people with little knowledge of existing gun laws, the constitution and its intent, how guns actually function, or simple facts and figures, to manipulate a majority of people to surrender their bill of rights. And based on emotion, not anything rational. Sorry, random isolated acts by madmen are no basis to attack the rights of millions of innocent people.
Number: "millions of gun owners should give up their right to own guns". Banning assault weapons is not asking millions of gun owners to give up their right to own guns. Based on the comments I've read by the pro gun people I would predict that if any government entity tries to confiscate any American citizen's legally owned firearm then this country is going to have a civil war that will make what is happening in Syria look like a picnic. The gun lobby is wealthy and powerful. Smart money is on WE THE PEOPLE. The poor fool who tries to confiscate ya'lls guns is a 'dead man walking'. WE THE PEOPLE are very clear about this issue-nobody is taking anything away from anybody without a fight. I'm not what you would call a real gun lover but I do believe in WE THE PEOPLE"S right to own legal firearms. We DO have the right to protect ourselves and our loved ones......(just no assaut weapons please)
Are you Paranoid
Delusional
or just a Rambo wannabe?
What the heck is going on in your State..or your community...or your neighborhood?
What riot?
Gangs of looters loitering around where you live?
NewYorka,
You're more likely to win the Powerball TWICE than be involved in an incident involving civil unrest. I'm just being realistic.
"The only thing any of these articles and discussion forums show is the intelligence and cluelessness of the people in them. There are more important things to take care of in this country and this sensless debate is keeping those things from being taken care of. A horrible crime was committed by a deranged little man and no amount of gun control or even a ban would have stopped it. Parenting would have been a start. This country is being destroyed economically, morally, and has a crumbling infrastructure. We are sitting here debating and ranting about how banning a law abiding citizens right to own weapons would have prevented a criminal from killing. How can you people not see the truth in any of this?"
So true #1 my sister is a RN in a large hospital, she has worked 12 years in mental health. When she notifies a Dr. of a probable threat she is told over and over" we can't label them, it will have a negative impact on there future". They need to be labeled and watched closely as we have found out.
Paranoid? Delusional? Rambo wannabe? Gimme a break...
WHY I CARRY A GUN
My old grandpa said to me son,' there comes a time in every mans life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps, and usually it's When he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin',
I don't carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don't carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.
I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.
I don't carry a gun because I'm evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.
I don't carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don't carry a gun because I'm angry.
I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.
I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don't carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Police Protection is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves. Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take an ass whoopin'. -- author unknown (but obviously brilliant)
Here are some facts about these "assault rifles." Criminals rarely use them because they are harder to conceal. Of the just under 9000 firearm murders in 2010 around 300 of them involved rifles - ALL RIFLES, not just semi-automatic assault rifles. Roughly 6000 involved handguns. Which is worse? Hell, about 2000 involved KNIFES. That's right, according to the FBI website, you are more than six times as likely to be stabbed to death than killed with a rifle and nearly 20 times as likely to die by a handgun than a rifle. In fact, blunt objects were significantly higher than rifles. So, please shut up about assault rifles being the route of the problem. They are not. LET'S NOT FORGET COLUMBINE HAPPENED UNDER THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN.
RI Mom - you must live in some kind of bubble if you can't see or feel the unrest that is going on across the country and why people are worried about their and their family's safety. The NRA isn't the villian - the villian is the mentally ill person who manages to get a gun and kill indiscriminately. If you have a concealed carry permit, you have to re-register every year. If you happen to become a felon after you have purchased a registered weapon, then I would imagine that you would have to discuss that with your parole officer (if you are out of jail).
Spiddas,
Part of the cultural problem surrounding all firearms issues are outlined beautifully by your post. We're far from the time when a farmer considered his firearm like another tool in his tool box. We're far from the time when the main reason to own a firearm was sustenance hunting. We far from a time where there are lawless regions.
There is zero sense sugar coating owning a gun for the reasons you describe. You own a gun to kill somebody. Who that somebody is depends only on the circumstance you find yourself in. You own a gun to scare people. People who might do you or your property harm. And if you relish in the day you get to defend yourself with a gun, you're probably the type who should think twice about owning anything dangerous. A justifiable homicide fantasy is just as sick as the grossly improbable and poorly thought out situation described above to justify the owning of large capacity magazines.
Tracy,
You've given me the opportunity to expand on these ideas further. How many people of the 750 million or so Americans who lived in the 20th century are victims of riots or mass looting? Of them, in how many instances would it have made sense to just run and forget things, which can be replaced? And of those few folks, how many would have been saved by having a few extra rounds in a magazine? It's zero. You'd be better off preparing by buying a parachute.
I also gather you didn't live through the 60's. Because the "unrest" going on now is nothing compared to that.
regarding the newtown massacre. the two people that were responsible for this horrible tragedy are both dead.
first..the mother knew her son had mental problems as shown by the reports she was in the process of trying to have him committed. yet she took no care to secure those weapons, that was ever reported, such as trigger locks or a gun safe.
second..the son wherever he was or whatever he was in his deranged mind should not have had access to those weapons. reports state he shot his way through the secured front door to the school and continued to carry out his mayhem.
my heart goes out to the parents and families of those killed. i could not begin to imagine their suffering.
that said...if the principal, the first to confront him and the first to die according to what i read, had been armed she would have had at least a chance of stopping him. if other school personnel had been armed they also would have had a chance of stopping him.
also..some of the media like piers morgan(spelling?) keep calling the rifle used a machine gun which goes to show the lack of knowledge of the subject at hand. they should educate themselves before opening their respective mouths.
RI Mom (although I don't know how)
have you ever watched TV?...L.A. has had several riots where people and property were at risk from morons (mostly lefty entitlement types) , Detroit has had the same thing , it has happened all over , know don't you feel more enlightened?, sure ya' do
I am very "Pragmatic" in my belief that pablum and drivle is being spewed on this matter...
Multi-Tasker,
Know what else would have stopped him? A gun safe. Responsible gun ownership. This topic is VERY absent from the national discussion.
John,
Your belief is your own. I'm not out to change your mind. I'm out to show you mine. Understanding those who disagree with you is how you engage in civil discourse. You perceive threats I do not. I live in a small community who all have close ties. I can count the number of violent crimes per year on a single hand. Our individual experience colors our opinions. My opinion comes from relative safety.
RI Mom, it's not paranoid to prepare one's self for a forseeable disaster.
I have never had a fire in my home nor do I know anyone who has however I can logically forsee that it's possible and I have several fire extinguishers and smoke alarms in my house.
I have never had my house robbed but I forsee the possiblity and I keep my doors locked and have a burgler alarm install in my home.
I have never had a home invasion but it has happened in my city so I keep a handgun nearby and my wife and I practice with it regularly(there was a drug related murder just one block from my home last year and I live in a rural area).
I have only had a flat tire once in my life but I carry a spare tire on my truck. I have emergency numbers programmed in my phone such as towing service, local hospitals, police etc..If the power goes out in the winter I have portable heaters with fuel, flashlights and a small generator to keep the fridge running.
I was born and raised in Florida (hurricane country) I keep emergency food and water stored plus other supplies on hand just in case. I keep a good supply of ammunition on hand for my various guns as well, just in case.
My wife and I are retired military so our training and experiences give us a basis for preparedness. Handguns, shotguns, rifles or "assualt riles" are not inherently dangerous by themselves, they are tools used for hunting, sporting events(competition target, trap, skeet), recreational shooting and survival/self defense. Like any tool it can be used for it's intended purpose by responsible people or be misused by irresponsible people.
I agree with several posts here citing FBI and CDC statistics, arm yourself with facts and use them responsibly. Murders by "assualt rifles" are an extremely small percentage of the total in this country yet they always receive a disproportionate amount of press coverage when they occur.
One thing, just to make a fact clear to all pro-gun control advocates, the murderer at the school in Newtown,CT used handguns to commit the crime. The "assualt rifle" paranoia in this particular case was completely generated by the media reporting the incident because the rifle was found in the trunk of the murderers car. Someone mentally deranged enough to commit this particularly foul crime would have found a way to make use of any tool available to him.
I feel the ultimate guilty party here was the first victim, if the mother had the weapons secured in a safe then her son would not likely have had access to them, plus if her child had access to mental health care early he may not have "snapped". There is alot of hindsight and second guesses in every tragic incident but lets not erode the rights of free and law abiding citizens in an emotionally charged fervor or a politically biased reaction. Restricting the liberties and rights of millions because of the actions of handful of socially deviant people is a very socialist attitude.
Lets remember that laws are only effective if people abide by them, we have laws prohibiting all manner of things including murder yet it still happens. Politicians create laws, that's part of what they do to justify their existance. New and more restrictive laws are not the answer, our society has problems with personal accountability, we are always looking for a cause or something/someone else to blame for terrible events.
Well said Wyatt. People forget about thr riots in California not that long ago, and that most of those who are in support of Cuomo's proposals would have been among those raising hell when they found out they had to wiat five days for a background check in order to buy a gun to protect themselves because the police were not capable of doing so, which brings up my second point. Any police officer who looks you in the eye and tells you they can guarantee your safety is lying. I've seen people in the midst of viloent episodes waiting 11, 15, 17 minutes waiting for the police to arrive and intervene becuase it was one of those crazy nghts. If you choose not to own a firearm to defend yourself, that is your choice, but please don't invoke your well intentioned but poorly informed restrictions on me. Fully 90% of what's being circulated about assault weapons is utter nonsense, including, with due resepct, the comments by General McCrystal. The only functional difference between what is commercially available as an assault rifle and my Remington 30.06 deer rifle is the magazine capacity (5 vs. 15 or more) and as far as lethality, the '06 is ballisticaly superior to the .223, hands down. See through the smoke screen people - it's a gun grab and nothing more!
pragmatic...
if you would have read the entire post you would have seen that i mentioned the mother did not secure the weapons properly with either trigger locks or a gun safe....read the entire post before commenting!
send Mussolini,"CUOMO" back to italy where he came from as well as his mobster father Mario Cuomo,he was also a crook ,the do as i say ,not as i do governors!!! we don't need these FACIST families back in this country
p.s. i was in those riots back in LA the only ones who survived were the ones who stood there ground and had shotguns ,pistols and AR15's ,everyone else got looted or burmed out,the police did nothing but flee and watched as the city burned to the ground in LA,they even tried to wiesel out of paying for damages that they failed to protect or stopped people from protecting them ,they even had the balls to change the law so they never have to "protect &serve" ,they won't pay a dime,
Does the 2nd amendment say "a well maintained hunting club?"
That's okay, the Constitution also does not contain the phrase "separation of church and state", and yet millions of american idiots think it does.
The first amendment doesn't contain the exact phrase. But it is shorthand for that. By the way, the church really doesn't want the state involved in its affairs either. Can you imagine if biblical morals were dictated by popular mandate?
That's okay, the Constitution also does not contain the phrase "separation of church and state", and yet millions of american idiots think it does.
no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
I wonder if Bloomberg's bodyguard will give up his FULLY AUTOMATIC UZI PISTOL?
sort of frightening that a State Governor doesn't even understand the rationale behind major parts of the friggin' constitution, isn't it?
How is there no test for this stuff?
Satan ick, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?? That DOES NOT require a seperation of Church and State. All you did was post a fact that you shall not be required to be of a religious affinity to gain office in the US.
Why are you trying to make a point without a point to be made?
Why do the people that read the 2nd Amendment and don't like firearms, stop reading it at the "militia" part? If you would keep reading it goes on to state "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Just for clarity I have included the whole text.
So, as you can see (if you aren't blinded by your political ideology) the founding fathers meant the 2nd Amendment to pertain to EVERY citizen, not just those in a militia.
Besides, when militias and survivalist groups were in the media not too long ago, a lot of people were vilifiying them also.
Gun Control
The Firearms Act of 1934 was not about gangsters. It was about a government who was afraid of the unemployed and angry WWI veterans who were experienced with guns.
The current government is taking defensive action against preppers, TEA partyers, and others.
The Innocents of Sandy Hook are being exploited.
The current government, with the racist in the White House in charge of it all, want to futher remove the abililty the current Constitution gives us to protect our families and communities. Has nothing to do with "preppers, TEA partyers"...
What do you have against the TEA Party? They demand that the US Government stop infringing on States rights, they demand that the Federal Goverment do THEIR jobs, and they expect the polititions to actaully follow the promises that they were elected on.
How is that so bad?
Sadden,
The Tea Party didn't exist when their party was doing the same thing they accuse the other party of doing. They don't care about the fundamentals of their platform, they just don't want the other guys doing it.
This thread is a perfect example. A state wants to enact laws within its own boarders. Folks who sometimes associate with the Tea party think that's a bad thing. So much for States' rights.
Problem is, a bunch of new laws and restrictions will have no effect on violent behavior or mass shootings. It is nothing but a restriction on those who obey the law. Haven't we seen just how well prohibitions work with drugs or alcohol? And haven't we seen just who gets rich from these prohibitions? It all sounds good on a sound byte, or looks good on paper. But in reality it just screws the folks who still play by the rules.
So lets just sit around banging a drum for gun control. Problem is, have of the people I have seen saying that cops should search and sieze every gun are the same people that are on the "Missouri automatic blood draw" thread crying about what an invasion of their rights that law would be.
Can't have it both ways. You want a police state or not?
Good Afternoon Tracy
Good point! Seems like the sheeple want things their way. Only problem is as sheeple, they are so difficult to come to even a quorum that it is kind of like trying to herd a bunch of cats and you know how that turns out!
the pathetic part, these were the same people that rightfully despised Bush and had a healthy mistrust for the government a few years ago.
Guess its hard for them to see things clearly from inside a Starbucks.
speaking about drums? i want a few drums if they ban 30 round mags :P
He is one of obama's whores what did you expect.
A big part of the problem is the redefining of what an Assault Rifle is.
The term Assault Weapon has been clearly defined by the BATF while now we have fully informed politicos miss representing certain other firearms types as assault weapons when they are not.
The missrepresentation should be enough to cause the proposed bill to be thrown out on the grounds that it is a lie.
ten bucks
Hey gun grabbers! What about this?
First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws
Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services
The systematic review development team identified 51 studies that evaluated the effects of selected firearms laws on violence and met the inclusion criteria for this review. No study was excluded because of limitations in design or execution. Information on violent outcomes was available in 48 studies, and the remaining three studies, which provided information on counts or proportions of regulated firearms used in crime, were used as supplementary evidence. Several studies examined more than one type of firearm law.
In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
Considering the CDC's budget for studying matters pertaining to firearms was stripped by the GOP in the 90's, I'm not surprised they didn't find enough evidence to determine anything.
"CDC"=Center for Disease Control, not Gun Control.
Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services
Prepared by
Robert A. Hahn, Ph.D.1
Oleg O. Bilukha, M.D., Ph.D.1
Alex Crosby, M.D.2
Mindy Thompson Fullilove, M.D.3
Akiva Liberman, Ph.D.4
Eve K. Moscicki, Sc.D.5
Susan Snyder, Ph.D.1
Farris Tuma, Sc.D.5
Peter Briss, M.D.1
1Division of Prevention Research and Analytic Methods
Epidemiology Program Office
2Division of Violence Prevention
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC
Atlanta, Georgia
3New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University
New York, New York
4National Institute of Justice
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, D.C.
5National Institute of Mental Health
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, Maryland
The material in this report was prepared by the Epidemiology Program Office, Stephen B. Thacker, M.D., Director; Division of Prevention Research and Analytic Methods, Richard E. Dixon, M.D., Director.
NPCDan,
It doesn't matter. The CDC isn't the only organization prohibited from conducting firearms research. I tried to compare the stats for car accidents and gun violence. While I found in-depth, detailed stats on car accidents, no such data exist for gun violence. Why is this information taboo? What are the gun lobbyists afraid that data will show? Why is it illegal to do this kind of research with tax payer money?
Hey Prag, why don't you google "fbi table 20"? All the answers are there. It's not a big secret.
Ban handguns.
Respect the 2nd amendment and get the nuts of the streets. All these gun laws just turn law abiding citizens into victims of over regulation and the criminals could care less about the actions of these politicians, Gun owners are being penalized because of lack of control of the nutcakes we have running around because the mental health care has fallen to the way side and it is very diffcult to commit the nut cakes. Nobody in their right mind would go shoot up a school or a movie theater. Sales between private parties perhaps should be better regulated. I do not own a assault rifle but I know people who do and they enjoy shooting them. I do not need a car that goes over 100 mph but some people like high powered fast cars. Should they be penalized because some folks drive to fast or reckless.
Yes, they should be penalized if they drive too fast or reckless. It's called a speed limit.
Ah, the Democratic politicians falling all over each other to become the 'toughest' on guns.
Biden, your turn!
The Biden plan is a little more sinister. His will be a redefinition of most semi auto guns as class 2 NFA weapons. This will be done by executive order, thus bypassing Congress and the Senate, or in effect an implementation of near dictatorial power.
Cuomo's "confiscation is an option" comment was a test balloon. It will be repeated every so often by one liberal jackass or another until it no longer elicits the expected opposition. Once the resistance is diminished they will make their move to confiscate weapons. First "assault" weapons, then hand guns. Straight out of the tyrant's handbook.
Executive order... Can he even do that legally? That would seem to fly in the face of the Supreme Court.
This man has appointed some 32 "czars" that answer directly to him without Congressional approval, and has already shown his distain for the Constitution. Would it really surprise you if he did?
Biden seems to think it is ok, and they will go as far as they are allowed or farther if they think they can make it stick.
I'm sure we hear from some of the legal minds on our side soon.
I feel impeachment proceedings should immediately be started if he does it.
NPCDan: Bull#$&%:
Q: Does Obama have an unprecedented number of "czars"?
A: "Czar" is media lingo, not an official title. But our research shows that George Bush’s administration had more "czars" than the Obama administration.
Now it’s turned odious again, with Republican senators calling czars unconstitutional and cable hosts like Beck and Sean Hannity characterizing them as shadowy under-the-table appointees used by Obama to dodge the usual approval processes. In fact, of the 32 czars Beck lists:
Keep on listening to Beck, and keep on hearing lies and half truths. Anything to pander to his entertainment audience.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/
FYI, I don't listen to Beck or Limbaugh anymore than I listen to Schultz or Maddow, because honestly they are all idiots, mayer included. But it would appear you certainly do. And out of those "appointments", how many failed due to political alliegance (Van), or failure to simply pay their taxes? Call bull$h1t on someone else. To be honest, I guessed at the number, thinking it would be deliberately high, but you've proved me wrong, and ironically, proved my point. Thanks.
tar &feather all the tyrants &hang them high from the brooklyn bridge
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Let the bootleg/counterfeiting begin .
Here is something to consider: Should we ban totem poles? A man in Duluth, Minnesota, killed his wife with a totem pole.
We can add screw driver and hammer control to that . A man in New York killed several people on a subway with a screw driver and many people have been killed with hammers. How about pencil control, they can be a dangerous weapon too.
I agree, anything can be a weapon, that's why I think nothing should be controlled. I mean it's the person and not the inanimate object that causes problems. I want a grenade just in case there is civil unrest and my home is getting attacked...no better yet how about an RPG, I should be able to skip down to the local gun store and get one, I'm just going to use it for self defense.
/s
Cue the response from the NRA, the same organization that attacked the first amendment in response to these mass killings. That's a funny kind of patriotism there guys.
Problem is, they will.
Go, Andy.
Yeah Andy....
Go all the way to Venezuela. Say HI to Hugo for us. Oh... could you get lost and not find your way back?
"An FBI review of all 2011 homicides for which data was available found that 67.8 percent of them involved firearms – 72.5 percent of which were handguns."
Hmmmm. Handguns you say? I thought all homicides were carried out by "high-powered assault" rifles? What is this madness? It couldn't possibly be that the media is skewing this to their liking...This all just a damn dog and pony show. This current administration has already decided on what actions they are going to take, blatently pointed out by 'ole "Bite me" Biden by the fact that these fiends are going to do whatever the hell they feel like doing "for the good of the country". Pshaw. They should have just appointed Maddoff to head up the treasury while they were at it...
Here is a simple solution: If you use a gun to commit any crime you automatically go to prison for LIFE without the possibility of parole. Go after the criminals not the law abiding citizens.
I would be willing to pay additional taxes to pay for the building of prisons and only prison needs no pork barrel add-on.
^Makes too much sense. It will never work.
Make it the death penalty. I'll personally purchase the bullets necessary to get thugs who use a firearm in the commission of a felony taken out of society.
I guess Cuomo doesn't care about this either.
The New York Civil Rights Law reads almost identical to the Second Amendment:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed.
Article 2, Section 4
A Well Regulated Militia requires Well Regulated Arms and Well Regulated Militia Members.
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed."
CANNOT BE INFRINGED!
Regulating arms is infringing.
well regulated, in 18th century parlance, basically meant "ready to rock."
There was no BATFE back then.
In 18th century lingo, well-regulated meant self-disciplined and proficient, not dominated by government control. Today, in most states, the militia is defined in legislation as being composed of all males (or adults) over and under certain ages that are able to bear arms. The militia was every citizen meeting the criteria that was not a uniformed soldier, and they were expected to answer the call out of a sense of responsibility and duty to defend their own liberties. They were not organized until necessity dictated such, but they were expected to maintain their skills (shooting) and their equipment, should the need arise for their services, and or sacrifice.
I will post this again.
Why do the people that read the 2nd Amendment and don't like firearms, stop reading it at the "militia" part? If you would keep reading it goes on to state "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Just for clarity I have included the whole text.
So, as you can see (if you aren't blinded by your political ideology) the founding fathers meant the 2nd Amendment to pertain to EVERY citizen, not just those in a militia.
Besides, when militias and survivalist groups were in the media not too long ago, a lot of people were vilifiying them also.
Let's treat firearms like cars. We must register them, notify the authorities when we sell them, be licensed to use them and have our privilege to own and use them revoked if we commit certain crimes.
Show me the guaranteed right to drive cars on public roads. You need no license to drive on private property. Only government owned roads.
And you don't have to notify anyone when you sell one, or is there any law that can take away you right to own a car. They can only take away your right to drive on government roads.
It's not a constitutional right to own a car. It's a privilege you pay for. Gun ownership is protected by the constitution.
And you already can lose your firearms if you commit certain crimes. Poaching usually results in loss of weapons for x period of time and felons or people convicted of domestic abuse or assault can't own guns. Like the posts above state, gun ownership is a right while driving is a privilege.
The only reason for such diligence with automobiles is "collection of taxes" Certainly no altruistic reasons.
And So It Begins..Again... ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
As in, "Give it your best shot...."
Notice how the MSM, the FDA and none in Congress say we should be looking into these psychotropic drugs these kids are on. I wonder if that's because the MSM gets ad revenue from Big Pharma, and members of Congress take campaign contributions from them? Adam Lanza was on Fanapt. Some of the side effects..."homicidal tendencies". These school shootings are nothings less than "false flags" to get our hi-cap semiautos. Once they get those, it's all down hill. TPTB know these events will happen, if they can just get the drugs on the street. And yes, I think they are capable of letting these things happen, so they can use them as a means to get more power over us. Remember Iraq and the WMD's? How many civilians did we kill there? Hopefully, we can all use the US Constitution to rally around. molon labe
OOOOkay Chuckster, what does that mean?
I think it means ban handguns.
So how would the Cuomo legislation prevented what happened in Connecticut? Or is he just blowing smoke up everyones butt.
Okay Gov. Lets start with your personal security detail....."No Guns Allowed". How do you like living under the laws you want to oppress everyone else with?
Laws & prohibition are abject failures when it comes to providing safety. If they worked there'd be no drug trade, no murders, no speeding, no anything. Laws only allow the gov't to enslave people.
The problem isn't guns, it is people. We have too many maladjusted bipeds that look human but are as far from human as the Universe is wide.
As for guns and being deadly, you're more apt to die at the hands of your doc than you are by a gun. Statistically speaking of course, as docs kill 100k+ a year and there are just a few of them as compared to the # guns and the # of deaths attributed to the guns. Ban docs, not guns.
190,000 deaths related to medical error every year... No one even blinks. What is wrong with this society?