11 Jan

A Little Reality in a Sea of Fantasy on Gun Control

                                       

I think it’s about time to sit down and talk with you realistically about the ignorance of those advocating for bans on so-called “assault weapons” (AW) and so-called “high-capacity” magazines.

First and foremost, I object to the use of both terms. They are nothing more than scare tactics designed by opponents to create fear of inanimate objects. They are used to assume there is safety in less capacity and less menacing characterics. However, I use the terms merely to sync my words with the common media vernacular to avoid confusion.

To be honest, I’m not even sure what constitutes an AW. I know that ARs and AKs fit into that category, but the using the 90′s AW ban as a guideline, the possibilities of defining a rifle as an AW are virtually limitless. Take the Ruger Mini-14, for example.

Mini14

I think everyone, including the gun control nazis, that this is a perfectly acceptable gun that we can trust the general population to own. It looks likes a perfectly fine weapon for hunting (understanding that the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting, as I’ve previously explained), right?

There is no extendable stock. It doesn’t have an evil pistol grip. It’s got a wooden frame instead of a black one. The magazine cannot hold 30 or more rounds. None of those murder-prone picatinny rails. It’s just a down-to-earth, typical American rifle one would expect to see in the back window of a pickup truck. But, it does shoot the standard .223 or 5.56mm rounds that most ARs shoot.

What’s great about Ruger’s Mini 14 is that is highly customizable. There is an endless number of changes that can be made to it to suit the owner’s likes and needs. Consider the following progression.

Mini14a

Uh oh. This is the same rifle, but it’s beginning to look scary with that collapsible stock and a pistol grip. However, since it’s still got a wooden frame and a small magazine it should still be ok.

Mini14b

Ok, now you’ve gone too far, CJ. This is simply unacceptable. It’s black and the magazine is much too large. We need to ban this weapon. Never mind that this one is the EXACT SAME weapon in terms of mechanics, lethality, accuracy, and cycling as the first one above. The problem is that this is the same weapon as the first one above. But, just for giggles, let’s take it one more step then I’ll get into some other aspects of these AW bans.

Mini14c

Now, THAT is how you kit out a Ruger Mini 14!!

But, let’s get serious for a moment, shall we? I live on my family farm here in Texas. The farm has been in our family for 4 generations. I live right across the street from the first plot of land my grandfather ever purchased. We now farm over 6,500 acres, much of it leased. We have hundreds of head of cattle. We are also dealers for Pioneer seed as well as fertilizer that farmers use to make the same acre of land fertile for growing crops year after year. One of the chemicals we use is called anhydrous ammonia.

Anhydrous ammonia is gas you can’t see, but can suffocate you with a sharp, pungent odor. Think about the worst smell of ammonia you’ve ever smelled and then multiply that probably 10 times. It is a chemical made up of one part nitrogen and three parts hydrogen and compressed into liquid form to fertilize fields. As you know, plants take nutrients out of the earth in order to grow. Using the same land to grow crops year after year or season after season depletes the soil of those much-needed nutrients, especially nitrogen.

Using anhydrous ammonia in fields replenishes that lost nitrogen into the soil. It’s very easy to apply and readily available to farmers. As it is released into the soil it expands into a gas where it rapidly combines with soil moisture.

Sounds harmless enough, right? Wrong.

Anhydrous ammonia is also an ingredient used to make methamphetamines. Most meth manufacturers reside in rural areas to avoid easy detection by police and neighbors, and use the resources that are readily available to them. These “resources” often include anhydrous ammonia.

Over the years, we have experienced several incidents where we had meth producers try to steal our anhydrous. One such instance that occurred the first year I moved back home resulted in a major chase between the thieves and my cousins. Seeing that we were all well-armed with different AW-type weapons, the thieves thought twice about sticking around. The mere sight of those guns was enough to scare them off and keep them away. We chased them out of the county.

Another aspect of living out in rural America that may necessitate the use of high capacity magazines is defending a herd or flock from coyotes. Coyotes hunt in both packs and individually. They are fast, moving targets. While many farmers employ the use of asses to defend their livestock, they aren’t always affective. Yes, there are lazy asses on farms too. In some places, farmers also have to contend with mountain lions and cougars as well. Why should we be relegated to just using hunting rifles when we just want to kill the threat to our livelihood?

However, there won’t always be a time when the thieves are going to be so easily spooked. I have no doubt that a desperate druggie may think he can shoot his way out. In such potential cases, only being able to own a 10-round clip isn’t going to help.

A criminal won’t care about capacity bans. If we were to obey the law and only own these smaller capacity clips, we would be at a major disadvantage.

There is a reason that Soldiers don’t use 10-round clips and haven’t since Vietnam. In the heat of the moment when adrenaline is high and nerves are tense, it’s often difficult to focus complete attention on the fundamentals of marksmanship, which include steady position, aim, breathing, and trigger squeeze. It’s hard to control breathing when you’re repelling an ambush or rushing through an urban environment. Not every round is going to hit your target and, let’s face it, the purpose behind using weapons is to remove the threat. Ten rounds weren’t cutting it on the battlefields of war, so you know they wouldn’t cut it in the criminal battlefields of America.

There are techniques to speed loading that many troops and police officers train on. One just need do a YouTube search for “speed loading rifle” to see that a trained shooter doesn’t need much time to reload a magazine. Even the untrained person wouldn’t have to take as much time to reload a magazine, providing he had more than one at his disposal.

The truth is that your average farmer or ranch owner isn’t going to carry around combat load of seven magazines. Most only even keep one magazine for each weapon they own unless it came with additional ones. A 10-round magazine simply won’t cut it when the need arises. And even if that person had several 10-round magazines loaded, he probably won’t remember to grab them when the threat materializes.

Even though I’ve give some reasons why “high capacity” magazines shouldn’t be banned, really my whole argument is a moot point. The type of magazine used isn’t what is contributing to the mass murders in this country. The fact is that any object in the hands of a criminal is a weapon. People are killed with bare fists, bats, pipes, trophies, scissors, knives, 2-hole punches, arrows, saws, screwdrivers, hammers, nail guns, golf clubs, rocks, rope, water, razors, electricity, bricks, broomsticks, totem poles, cars, tire irons, pillows, drugs, explosives, fire, tree branches, poison, ice picks, shovels, machetes, swords, candlesticks, etc. But, we aren’t banning those devices, are we?

Besides all the reasons I mentioned above, the simple fact is that an AW ban still won’t work. Just yesterday there was a story about a kid who planned his killing for a year. The shooter didn’t use an AW to target his classmates. He used a shotgun. If not for the brave actions of completely unarmed faculty, the results still could have been deadly. The shooter had 20 more rounds in his pocket and it doesn’t take long to load a shotgun either.

Keep these things in mind the next time someone poses the ignorant question, “why do regular citizens need an AW anyway?” Then also remind them about what happened during the LA riots. I more shop owners wish they had one then.

This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Constitution and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Friday, January 11th, 2013 at 1:02 pm
| 1,569 views

82 Responses to A Little Reality in a Sea of Fantasy on Gun Control

  1. Hard Right says: 51

    When castro came to power in Cuba, he started with firearms confiscation.

    ReplyReply
  2. Greg says: 52

    @retire05, #46:

    Supply and the enormous increase in the volume of sales might be an issue. Legal owners apparently aren’t doing a very good job of keeping the guns they buy out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. Either that, or a lot of gun sales are being made to people who shouldn’t legally be able to buy them in the first place. It seems like it’s got to be one or the other. Which problem do you think needs to be addressed?

    ReplyReply
  3. retire05 says: 53

    @Greg:

    Legal owners apparently aren’t doing a very good job of keeping the guns they buy out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them.

    That’s rich, Greggie, especially coming from someone who supports the Obama administration that allowed over 2,000 guns to be illegally sold to Mexican cartel members who used one of those guns to kill Border Patrol Brian Terry and another one to be used to kill Jamie Zapata. But being the dimwit you are, I am sure you can’t possibly imagine that any of those guns have been used in other crimes here in the U.S. They have; at least in 11 crimes.

    How about we keep our legally owned guns, and you start lobbying for liberal, panty waisted judges to put the criminals in jail, for a long time, instead of letting their bleating hearts release them? Let’s try putting criminals who rob homes in jail and not just giving them a slap on the hand and letting them go their own way? Would that be too much to ask?

    Everywhere legal gun ownership has increased, crime rates have gone down. Even in leftist California. Yet, you will never admit that. You’re too busy trying to destroy the Second Amendment. You sick leftists did so well destroying the Fourth Amendment, why not?

    The Democrats want to make illegals who are criminals legal and make legal gun owners criminals. And you claim they [the Dems] are not nuts?

    ReplyReply
  4. Greg says: 54

    Everywhere legal gun ownership has increased, crime rates have gone down.

    Do you have a link to some credible study to back assertion that up? The emphasis here being on the word credible, because I think the assertion might be a load of horse manure.

    I’ll concede that the assertion could be true to a point–much like the Laffer curve could be true to a point. In the case of gun ownership, it could be true up to the point where responsible people are the ones predominantly purchasing guns. Once the percentage of the general population that own guns begins to exceed the percentage of responsible people, however, further increases in the percentage of ownership will have negative rather than a positive effects.

    What percentage of the general population do you suppose isn’t really qualified to have ready access to a deadly weapon? Do you imagine that anyone without a criminal record and without a documented history of mental illness is automatically qualified to carry a semi-automatic pistol in public places?

    ReplyReply
  5. Hard Right says: 55

    Greg’s definition of credible study:
    If it proves something he doesn’t want to believe, it isn’t credible. If it does prove what he wants to believe, it is credible.

    ReplyReply
  6. retire05 says: 56

    @Greg:

    Are you too stupid to do your own research? Here, figure this out: The FBI reports that in the year 2000, there were 8,543,037 total NICS background checks. In 2008, that number increased by 48%. In just the last four years, we have seen an incease in NCIS background checks of 54%. Following so far, Greggie, because I know you’re kinda slow?

    And what has happened to the violent crime rate? Well, according to the FBI, the violent crime rate continues of go down, and has been ever since the assault weapons ban was lifted. Now, you can take my word for it, or you can do your own research, that is, providing your not too stupid, or too lazy, to do it.

    So, if the free exercise of the Second Amendment is so bad, as claimed by your fellow Socialists, then how do you explain a decreasing violent crime rate?

    Here is a headline for you from the Sacramento Bee (that’s in California, Greggie):

    California gun sales jump; gun injuries, deaths fall.

    Explain that. And gun ownership is not economics, Greggie. No Laffer Curve applicable.

    What percentage of the general population do you suppose isn’t really qualified to have ready access to a deadly weapon?

    Anyone who votes for the Democrats.

    Yes, I imagine that anyone without a criminal record or a history of mental illness should be able to carry a firearm, whenever and where ever they wish. As a matter of fact, in my own state, I can walk into the State Capital building carrying my semi-automatic (one trigger pull per shell) rifle. Yes, the State Police will be watching me, but it is legal. How many shootings at the Texas State Capital have you heard of?

    ReplyReply
  7. Pingback: A Little Reality in a Sea of Fantasy on Gun Control - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

  8. Greg says: 57

    @retire05, #56:

    Are you too stupid to do your own research? Here, figure this out: The FBI reports that in the year 2000, there were 8,543,037 total NICS background checks . . .

    Correlation does not imply causation. For example, the fact you’re invariably insulting to people who politely disagree with you does not indicate that rudeness is caused by or directly related to stupidity.

    Yes, I imagine that anyone without a criminal record or a history of mental illness should be able to carry a firearm, whenever and where ever they wish.

    That’s so ridiculous that I won’t even comment.

    ReplyReply
  9. retire05 says: 58

    @Greg:

    I am rude to you, Greggie, because I cannot abide stupidity in an adult man. And that is you.

    Now, why don’t you tell us how many shootings there has been at the Texas State Capital? Or do you just intend to continue to be obtuse?

    ReplyReply
  10. Greg says: 59

    I find it a bit odd that someone who advocates carrying firearms would make a habit of insulting people.

    If in fact there are few shootings in the Texas State Capital, it must be because most people there tend to show a bit more common courtesy.

    ReplyReply
  11. retire05 says: 60

    @Greg:

    Gee, Greggie, do you think because someone is unwilling to tolerate your stupidity they would want to harm you? The only danger you have from me is if you grow four legs and and a set of horns and you’re in season.

    ReplyReply
  12. theBuckWheat says: 61

    We don’t ask if anyone needs 30 pages of Hustler Magazine. We don’t say,well we think Hustler is icky (which I do) and causes untold bad effects on society, and that justifies us limiting it to 30 pages, then to 10 then to “five or six”, then to three, then to one then to ZERO pages. No, we know that the right of free expression in the First Amendment is not measured by the number of pages.

    And neither is the right to keep and bear arms measured by the number of rounds in a particular magazine.

    ReplyReply
  13. Greg says: 62

    @retire05, #60:

    What I was suggesting is that rude attitudes occasionally meet up with gun-toting hotheads, who are already only one insult away from popping their corks. You’re bound to get a few of those, when anyone who wants to carry wherever and whenever is allowed to do so.

    You’re kind of slow on the uptake, pard, for someone who thinks he’s smarter than anyone and everyone who disagrees with him.

    ReplyReply
  14. Smorgasbord says: 63

    @Hard Right: #51

    When castro came to power in Cuba, he started with firearms confiscation.

    So did Hitler, and many other leaders who became dictators.

    ReplyReply
  15. Smorgasbord
    yes they cannot do it in the USA, THE SHERIFS HAVE THE FULL POWER TO OVERTURN THE FEDERAL
    DECISIONS IF THAT’S WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE WANT,
    THANK’S TO THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION,

    ReplyReply
  16. retire05 says: 65

    @Greg:

    Twenty years ago you could go to any rural high school parking lot and you would see lots of pickup trucks with gun racks in the back windows with long barrels on them. No one thought anything about that. Where were all the school shootings back then?

    By your bench mark, there must have been no rude kids in any of those schools all across the nation, coast to coast, because no one got shot in school. Oh, but wait, back then we had gun clubs at high schools. Kids actually competed in trap shooting. But then, someone decided that practice was politically incorrect, and they started the “zero tolerance” programs where it has now gotten so out of hand that if a kid makes a sign with his fingers that looks like a gun he is suspended from school, his parents are forced to take the kid to a psychiatrist because he might be dangerous, and he is considered a bane on society, never mind that the kid is only 6 years-old and has watched violent movies all his life. Nah, movies are not responsible for anything. It’s just a movie.

    People like you will make excuse after excuse for taking guns away from law abiding citizens. How else can you implement your totalitarian control? Armed citizens are not slaves. But disarmed citizens can be loaded up on rail cars and sent to “re-education” camps for their own good, right?

    How many Americans do you think went hunting last year, Greggie? And how many gun murders did those hunters commit? Does it matter what weapon they used to hunt with? A good shot can kill just as quickly with a .22 as they can with an AK-47. But most .22s don’t look scary, do they, so they would be OK.

    You’re a Socialist. You think we should all be wards of the state. But most people don’t agree with you, and if you think that your Socialist president (Obama) will ever be able to disarm this nation by taking guns away from law abiding citizens, you’re wrong. And as a Socialist, you dump the responsibility for your own protection on those who own guns. That makes you a coward.

    ReplyReply
  17. westie says: 66

    I many times wonder if Greg is paid to post stupid leftisms here just to provide a foil to spar against. No one is this dense!

    ReplyReply
  18. Smorgasbord says: 67

    @westie: #66
    I’ve mentioned different times that it wouldn’t surprise me if the liberals are making bets on how many comments they can get. They might even have a points system to see who can get the most points.

    ReplyReply
  19. UpChuck.Liberals says: 68

    As one of the leaders of CalGuns said, the AR-15 is the Barbi Doll of rifles, you can dress it up anyway you want. In the end though is still a semi-automatic which qualifies as a big whoop. The ONLY reason the Dim-O-Krats ae going after them again is that we stand between them and a totaliatarian state, their idea of Socialist Nirvana.

    ReplyReply
  20. Greg says: 69

    @retire05, #65:

    Twenty years ago you could go to any rural high school parking lot and you would see lots of pickup trucks with gun racks in the back windows with long barrels on them. No one thought anything about that. Where were all the school shootings back then?

    People have changed. The common courtesy of the world I grew up in no longer exists. If I call a checkout girl ma’am, half the time I get an annoyed look. If I address a younger man as sir, half the time they seem to think I’m trying to be a wise ass. Many seem to consider courtesy either a sign of weakness, or a provocation. The thought of too many such people getting the the message that carrying a firearm is not just OK, but the thing to do, worries me. That’s the message of the gun industry, with dollar signs in their beady little eyes, and of the NRA, whose leadership represents not responsible gun owners, but the domestic gun industry and everyone’s crazy aunts and uncles.

    People like you will make excuse after excuse for taking guns away from law abiding citizens. How else can you implement your totalitarian control?

    Bullshit. People like myself—that is, mainstream American citizens—simply want tighter controls. Most support the right to own firearms. Many own firearms. Most, however, believe that military style weapons, and tactical accessories that turn them into more efficient high-volume killing tools, have no place in the average household. Nor should it be made as easy to buy a handgun as it is to buy a set of golf clubs.

    I don’t think the explosion of firearm sales is a good thing. I see no evidence that people in general are getting smarter, politer, or better able to exercise sound judgement and self control. If anything, responsible adulthood and sound judgement are arriving later and later, and in some cases aren’t showing up at all.

    You’re a Socialist. You think we should all be wards of the state.

    You seem to want to make it easy for people who actually should be wards of the state to buy an assault rifle. The political landscape doesn’t divide between right-wing extremists and socialists. That’s only the prevailing view among right-wing extremists. Rational, moderate republicans should really make a concerted effort to regain control of their GOP before the extremist lunatics bring it to total ruin.

    As part of the same program, maybe rational, non-extremist members of the NRA—which I presume to be a majority—should try to regain control of their own organization.

    Only one month after the Sandy Hook massacre, the NRA has released a first-person shooter game, for ages 4 and up. PR considerations, anyone? The NRA’s present leadership must be total imbeciles.

    ReplyReply
  21. this NEWSPAPER STUPID LIBERALS ,PUT A MAP IN THEIR PAPER,
    THEY ARE THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR CRIMES LATELY,
    AND THE RUSH FOR GUNS ALONG THEIR IDOL OBAMA, WITH HIS WARNING WORDS
    UNDERNEAT HIS SPEECH OF PUNISHING NOT THE CRIMINALS, BUT THE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS,
    THOSE ALSO WHO MAKE AN HONEST LIVING WITH SELLING GUN AND BULLETS,
    THIS MAN WHO WAS TRYING TO FIND ANSWERS OF WHY THEY FROZE HIS ACCOUNT,
    NOW WILL LOOSE HIS BUSINESS TOTALY FROM WHAT I HEARD AT FOX NEWS THAT OBAMA WILL
    WANT THE INTERNET BUSINESS CLOSED,
    PEOPLE TRYING TO OPEN BUSINESS HONEST BUSINESS AND THERE OBAMA PUT THEM OUT OF WORK,
    THE ECONOMY STUPID THE OBAMA’S WAY,
    HE HAS MESSED UP THE WARRIORS,
    AND HE IS OUT TO MESSED UP THE GOOD AMERICANS MAKING A LIVING,

    ReplyReply
  22. retire05 says: 71

    @Greg:

    Yes, Greggie, people have changed. And you can thank the liberal/progressives for that. No one is now ever responsible for their own actions. Every kid gets a trophy because God forbid, that kid should actually have to work to earn grades or play in the Little League All Stars. You do drugs? No problem. It’s a disease and we will treat you for that for free. You have unsafe sex and got pregnant? No problem. You can kill your baby because after all, it’s only a clump of cells. You put your manhood where another man evacuates his bowels and contracted HIV/AIDs? No big deal. The taxpayers will pay for your medication.

    So you fein surprise that you are treated with disdain when you are polite to someone? It was your side of the aisle that demanded that we remove God from the schools, and just let little Johnnie/Janie do what feels good.

    You want more gun “control.” So how is that working out in Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation? Or in D.C., where guns are basically illegal? How about St. Louis, another town that is run by lunatic leftists, that managed to be the murder capital of the nation until Chicago took that dishonor? And don’t think, by any stretch of your imagination, that you are mainsteam. You’re not. Most Americans want the right to protect their families, and themselves, without being made the criminals you side would make them. But hey, if you violated our sovereignty laws and came to this nation illegally, you side wants to make them into legal residents. No punishment.

    Oh, and let’s talk about those who actually should be wards of the state. Remind me again what the party was of the president who signed the HIPPA laws that make it almost impossible for a doctor to report to the authorities someone they think is a loose cannon? And remind me again whose campaigns the trial lawyers donate their money to. So a doctor lays his practice on the line, reports to the authorities someone he/she thinks might pose a danger to society and believe me, there is some scum-bag lawyer waiting in the alley just dying to slam that doctor with a violation of his clients privacy rights and sue that doctor into poverty. According to OpenSecrets.org, lawyers, and law firms, bundled $42,050,000.00 for Obama. There is a reason that lawyers/law firms bundled over twice the money for Obama as any other industry. It’s called tort.

    Now, I noticed you linked to an article about a NRA video. I also noticed you never mentioned that it had to be purchased through iPhone. Of course, you did not mention this little tineey, tiny part of the article “Apple rates it as being appropriate for children 4 and up.” Oh, wait, APPLE rates it for age 4 and up, NOT the NRA? And how come you did not mention the newest rage on the internet, a free download of a video that allows you to kill NRA employees?

    See, Greggie, you are blatantly dishonest. You, like all progressives, only give enough information to support your agenda. You eliminate facts, like APPLE rated the video, because to give that fact would reflect on APPLE, not the NRA. If you want to talk about reducing crime from guns, then give a cogent argument about how to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, not how to punish law abiding citizens for the actions of criminals, because every damn gun law you progressives have passed is not working. Criminals are still getting guns, some of them from our own government. Where is your outrage over Fast and Furious?

    You rail on the NRA because you are afraid of guns. Do you even know why the National Rifle Association was started after the Civil War? No, you just know you don’t like guns, swallow the progressive clap-trap that more guns means more crime, although the FBI stats disprove that, so you obfuscate facts because you don’t want other people to have guns unless you, or one of your ilk, says it is OK. How hypocritical is it of Dianne Feinstein to say that she would make all Americans turn their guns in when she, herself, has a concealed carry permit?

    Get back to me when you decide that you want to debate this issue honestly, without the spin. I truely don’t think you’re capable of honesty.

    ReplyReply
  23. Greg says: 72

    @retire05, #71:

    You rail on the NRA because you are afraid of guns.

    I own a gun. I’ve owned a gun my entire adult life. What I’m afraid of are nitwits with guns, and jackasses who believe that any other nitwit is automatically entitled to strut around carrying one.

    ReplyReply
  24. retire05 says: 73

    @Greg:

    So you own a gun. How do we know that you are not one of those nitwits with guns? Frankly, I think people should be leary of you, Greggie.

    ReplyReply
  25. Petercat says: 74

    @ilovebeeswarzone: #36
    Great mental image, Bees.
    Now I’m picturing you in a cartoon, sitting in a cannibal’s pot in the jungle somewhere.
    Asking for more soap.
    Or seasoning…

    Oh, and I’m scheduled to go back to the surgeon in March, to see if knee replacement surgery will be possible after all. The arthritis was caused by a screw from the original bone repair entering the joint and chewing up the cartilage. Not age or bacteria related at all. I’m much more comfortable since he took the screw out. Still using the cane, but at least I now have hope!

    ReplyReply
  26. Petercat
    hi, glad to know it’s just the screw, it will make it easy to repair it now,
    just be carefull to not eat bacteries in the mean time,
    and I have to get out of that cannibal pot, but where would I go,
    oops!!!!!!they are coming with more seasoning,
    or!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    KINGKONG WHERE ARE YOU
    bye

    ReplyReply
  27. O’REILLY ON OBAMA REJECT THE BIBLE ON HIS INAUGURATION,
    NOW AFTER THIS COMMERCIAL

    ReplyReply
  28. O’REILLY HAD A GUY WITH HIS ORGANISM CALL ; FREEDOM FROM RELIGION
    COVERING OBAMA DECISION,
    WHAT A PRICK KNOW IT ALL

    ReplyReply
  29. proof
    yes and they should stop the flow of illegals from the borders,
    and close adequatly those borders, than that will be a intelligent first step
    to curve violence by cutting as much druggs on the streets which render some in a dangerous state of mind.
    then you move on to keeping the criminals where they belong, even if OBAMA TRY TO GET THE BLACKS OUT BEFORE THEY HAVE DONE THEIR TIMES. THEY COME OUT AS DANGEROUS TO SOCIETY,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  30. PUCKBOY99 says: 79

    Diane Feinstein to Meet The Press host Bob Scheiffer: “And what we have found, that, now, with the AR-15, they have a slide stock which you put in. It’s legal. And it makes the gun act fully automatic.”

    She believes that by folding a collapsable stock, it turns an AR-15 into a fully automatic weapon.

    Be very afraid of the incredibly ignorant wielding legislative power.

    ReplyReply
  31. PUCKBOY99
    WELCOME
    yes you raise a good warning,
    the journalist CHARLY HURT ABOUT THE DEBATE GOING ON ,
    SAID THEY SHOULD START BY THE GAMES THE CHILDREN ARE INTOXICATED ON, AND THE MOVIES MOST OF THEM USING GUN SHOOTING, PLAYING A VERY INFLUENCAL HOLD ON THE YOUNGS ALSO,
    INSTEAD OF STARTING BY BANNING SOME GUNS WHICH BEING AUTOMATIC WOULD BE DOING A QUICKER JOB TO ELIMINATE AN ATTACKER,
    I ALSO THINK THAT ANYONE WHO WANT TO GIVE A SPEECH ON THE PUBLIC PLACE , NO MATTER HOW SMALL OR BIG THEY EXPECT THE CROWD TO COME, THEY SHOULD HAVE GUN OWNERS INSIDE THE CROWD MORE OR LESS DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, EVEN AS THEY WILL PAY FOR IT AT THE END, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE RESPONSIBLE OF THAT ASSEMBLY,
    THAT IS MY STRONG BELIEF, AND HOW COME THEY HAD TO WAIT FOR 26 CHILDREN AND ADULT TO BE KILL?,
    THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO BE INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX, FOR INCLUSDING A CONCEILED GUN OWNER IN SCHOOL THIS IS A BIG MISTAKE TO INCLUDE EVERY THING AND LEAVE OUT THE NUMBER ONE RULE THAT IS THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN,
    THEY ALL PUSH THE BLAME TO OTHER BUT IT’S VISIBLE, AND FOR SAVING COST I THINK,
    BYE

    ReplyReply
  32. Smorgasbord says: 81

    @PUCKBOY99: #79
    It doesn’t matter if she believes it. It only matters if she can convince YOU to believe it. Sometimes we can’t tell the difference between liberal ignorance, and liberal brainwashing. Which one is this statement?

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>