What's new
By:

Gun Control

fishonjazz said:
Ah I see..... scary stuff
Thank god I don't register my car, pay bills, have a bank account, or use the internet so the government will never be able to find me!
Just playin..... I guess I can understand your fear of going on some government list.
Click to expand...

I understand that remark was tongue in cheek, but the difference is, there aren't politicians who have flatly stated that they want to take your car, your Internet, or your bank account away from you because they feel you shouldn't have them.
 
Bronco70 said:
I understand that remark was tongue in cheek, but the difference is, there aren't politicians who have flatly stated that they want to take your car, your Internet, or your bank account away from you because they feel you shouldn't have them.
Click to expand...

I have never heard anyone say that they are going to take anyone's guns.

Maybe stop allowing guns to be purchased and such, but I have not heard any polititions say "we are going to come into everyones homes and take your guns away
 
544766_519870868077472_984703372_n.jpg


A SENATE IN THE GUN LOBBY'S GRIP

By GABRIELLE GIFFORDS
Published: April 17, 2013

SENATORS say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them.

On Wednesday, a minority of senators gave into fear and blocked common-sense legislation that would have made it harder for criminals and people with dangerous mental illnesses to get hold of deadly firearms — a bill that could prevent future tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., and too many communities to count.

Some of the senators who voted against the background-check amendments have met with grieving parents whose children were murdered at Sandy Hook, in Newtown. Some of the senators who voted no have also looked into my eyes as I talked about my experience being shot in the head at point-blank range in suburban Tucson two years ago, and expressed sympathy for the 18 other people shot besides me, 6 of whom died. These senators have heard from their constituents — who polls show overwhelmingly favored expanding background checks. And still these senators decided to do nothing. Shame on them.

I watch TV and read the papers like everyone else. We know what we’re going to hear: vague platitudes like “tough vote” and “complicated issue.” I was elected six times to represent southern Arizona, in the State Legislature and then in Congress. I know what a complicated issue is; I know what it feels like to take a tough vote. This was neither. These senators made their decision based on political fear and on cold calculations about the money of special interests like the National Rifle Association, which in the last election cycle spent around $25 million on contributions, lobbying and outside spending.

Speaking is physically difficult for me. But my feelings are clear: I’m furious. I will not rest until we have righted the wrong these senators have done, and until we have changed our laws so we can look parents in the face and say: We are trying to keep your children safe. We cannot allow the status quo — desperately protected by the gun lobby so that they can make more money by spreading fear and misinformation — to go on.

I am asking every reasonable American to help me tell the truth about the cowardice these senators demonstrated. I am asking for mothers to stop these lawmakers at the grocery store and tell them: You’ve lost my vote. I am asking activists to unsubscribe from these senators’ e-mail lists and to stop giving them money. I’m asking citizens to go to their offices and say: You’ve disappointed me, and there will be consequences.

People have told me that I’m courageous, but I have seen greater courage. Gabe Zimmerman, my friend and staff member in whose honor we dedicated a room in the United States Capitol this week, saw me shot in the head and saw the shooter turn his gunfire on others. Gabe ran toward me as I lay bleeding. Toward gunfire. And then the gunman shot him, and then Gabe died. His body lay on the pavement in front of the Safeway for hours.

I have thought a lot about why Gabe ran toward me when he could have run away. Service was part of his life, but it was also his job. The senators who voted against background checks for online and gun-show sales, and those who voted against checks to screen out would-be gun buyers with mental illness, failed to do their job.

They looked at these most benign and practical of solutions, offered by moderates from each party, and then they looked over their shoulder at the powerful, shadowy gun lobby — and brought shame on themselves and our government itself by choosing to do nothing.

They will try to hide their decision behind grand talk, behind willfully false accounts of what the bill might have done — trust me, I know how politicians talk when they want to distract you — but their decision was based on a misplaced sense of self-interest. I say misplaced, because to preserve their dignity and their legacy, they should have heeded the voices of their constituents. They should have honored the legacy of the thousands of victims of gun violence and their families, who have begged for action, not because it would bring their loved ones back, but so that others might be spared their agony.

This defeat is only the latest chapter of what I’ve always known would be a long, hard haul. Our democracy’s history is littered with names we neither remember nor celebrate — people who stood in the way of progress while protecting the powerful. On Wednesday, a number of senators voted to join that list.

Mark my words: if we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s. To do nothing while others are in danger is not the American way.

Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic representative from Arizona from 2007 to 2012, is a founder of Americans for Responsible Solutions, which focuses on gun violence.
Click to expand...
 
fishonjazz said:
I have never heard anyone say that they are going to take anyone's guns.

Maybe stop allowing guns to be purchased and such, but I have not heard any polititions say "we are going to come into everyones homes and take your guns away
Click to expand...

That's because nobody has said they are going to come take guns. But that's not what I said. I said they want to. It's not all anti-gunners (a small minority of them, I'd guess). A handful of politicos who, given the opportunity, would be completely in favor of taking guns away from all law abiding citizens.

I have said before (probably in this sprawling thread) that I think gun confiscation is unlikely, primarily because it would be prohibitively expensive and a logistical nightmare. But, if the day came that the idea somehow gained enough traction to be executed, where would be the logical place to start? Wherever there's a paper trail. And as long as the possibility exists, however remote, it is a legitimate concern.
 
fishonjazz said:
Criminals should be very happy since they know that they can just go to a gun show or on the web and buy guns without worrying about a background check.
Hooray
Click to expand...

So I guess my posts have been a little wordy for you...

Go to a gun show and tell me if you can buy a gun without a background check. My guess is that you can't.
 
Bronco70 said:
That's because nobody has said they are going to come take guns. But that's not what I said. I said they want to. It's not all anti-gunners (a small minority of them, I'd guess). A handful of politicos who, given the opportunity, would be completely in favor of taking guns away from all law abiding citizens.

I have said before (probably in this sprawling thread) that I think gun confiscation is unlikely, primarily because it would be prohibitively expensive and a logistical nightmare. But, if the day came that the idea somehow gained enough traction to be executed, where would be the logical place to start? Wherever there's a paper trail. And as long as the possibility exists, however remote, it is a legitimate concern.
Click to expand...

I think the loss of life would be very high as well.
 
moevillini said:
544766_519870868077472_984703372_n.jpg
Click to expand...

They keep referring to their "common sense" legislation. I disagree. It's "feel good" legislation and little more.

I'm not a member of the NRA. I'm not particularly fond of the NRA. The NRA has nothing to do with where I stand on this issue.
 
fishonjazz said:
Couldn't law abiding citizens still get guns if it would have passed?
Click to expand...

Yes.

The problem is, as I see it, pro gun-control folks have demonstrated again and again that they are not interested in listening to people with extensive firearms experience. They don't want to hear any of our "common sense" while they are cramming new laws down our throats and screaming to the masses that we're being unreasonable and can't even accept their "common sense" regulations. They never wanted to hear the reality of why their laws don't make any sense and will not solve any problems.
 
Hartsock said:
Don't get this argument. You got something to hide?
Click to expand...

There are millions of people in the U.S. in prison who never hurt anyone. I'm not interested in being scrutinized by the force that is responsible for such atrocities.
 
Gameface said:
They keep referring to their "common sense" legislation. I disagree. It's "feel good" legislation and little more.

I'm not a member of the NRA. I'm not particularly fond of the NRA. The NRA has nothing to do with where I stand on this issue.
Click to expand...

I only hope there are people willing to work on finding areas of compromise.
 
Gameface said:
Yes.

The problem is, as I see it, pro gun-control folks have demonstrated again and again that they are not interested in listening to people with extensive firearms experience. They don't want to hear any of our "common sense" while they are cramming new laws down our throats and screaming to the masses that we're being unreasonable and can't even accept their "common sense" regulations. They never wanted to hear the reality of why their laws don't make any sense and will not solve any problems.
Click to expand...

So what WILL make sense? What should I be listening to?
 
Hartsock said:
Don't get this argument. You got something to hide?
Click to expand...

That's a horrible argument and a bullying tactic. People who favor police intervention and powers constantly use it to silence opposition, because who wants to admit they have things they want to hide?

Everyone has things they want to hide, including me, and I'll wager including you.
 
One Brow said:
That's a horrible argument and a bullying tactic. People who favor police intervention and powers constantly use it to silence opposition, because who wants to admit they have things they want to hide?

Everyone has things they want to hide, including me, and I'll wager including you.
Click to expand...

Not from the government. If me having to give a background check in order to keep a few guns away from a few lunatics than so be it.
 
Bronco70 said:
That's because nobody has said they are going to come take guns. But that's not what I said. I said they want to. It's not all anti-gunners (a small minority of them, I'd guess). A handful of politicos who, given the opportunity, would be completely in favor of taking guns away from all law abiding citizens.

I have said before (probably in this sprawling thread) that I think gun confiscation is unlikely, primarily because it would be prohibitively expensive and a logistical nightmare. But, if the day came that the idea somehow gained enough traction to be executed, where would be the logical place to start? Wherever there's a paper trail. And as long as the possibility exists, however remote, it is a legitimate concern.
Click to expand...

Good answer, if a little paranoid.
 
Gameface said:
So I guess my posts have been a little wordy for you...

Go to a gun show and tell me if you can buy a gun without a background check. My guess is that you can't.
Click to expand...

So If I already cant buy a gun without a background check.... why would it be bad to require a background check? According to you its already happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top