March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 750 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,009
Members14,391
Most Online1,131
Jan 21st, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 10 of 37 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 36 37
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 87
Sidelock
Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 87
Have you not contacted your Senator/House member because you are 100% positive they are with us on defeating challenges to 2nt amendment rights? Even if you are 200% positive, please contact them anyway. I think the advice I was given years ago about running for elective office applies: "You know your grandma is going to vote for you, but she still wants to be asked"

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
It's a truthful and common sense statement, that quote. Only problem is that publics often are motivated more by fear and security than liberty, allowing government breaches of constitutional rights every day.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 996
Likes: 9
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 996
Likes: 9
Here's a sensible addition to the debate from Republican Jim Baker and Democrat John Dingell, both steeped in our love of firearms and hunting. It's an Op-Ed in the 30 January edition of the New York Times.

Regards
---------------------------------------

OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS
Bipartisan Hunting Buddies
By JAMES A. BAKER III and JOHN D. DINGELL
Published: January 29, 2013

WE are as different as North and South. One of us, John Dingell, is a liberal Michigan Democrat and the other, Jim Baker, is a conservative Texas Republican. We met during the Reagan administration and have often found ourselves on opposite sides of political battles. We have the bruises to show for them.

We do, however, share some beliefs. One is a strong love of guns and the outdoors and, just as important, a respect for both. Since we were boys, some of our best times have come with rifles or shotguns in our hands, especially when hunting with our fathers. Jim hunted ducks in the wetlands of southeast Texas and elk in the Rocky Mountains. John hunted small game along the banks of the Detroit River and Lake Erie. As adults, we have hunted together, using our common bond to bridge our differences.

We’re also united by outrage over the rampage killings in an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., and other despicable episodes of gun violence. At the same time, we believe the Second Amendment provides Americans with an important freedom that makes our country special.

But the harsh truth is that too many Americans are dying from gun-related shootings — more than 30,000 each year and more than one million since 1960. Gun violence now rivals traffic accidents as the leading cause of death by injury in the United States. Quite simply, gun violence threatens to overwhelm us.

Americans are grappling for strategies to make sure that the horror that occurred in Newtown isn’t repeated. The White House has made suggestions, and many governors have offered theirs. The National Rifle Association has spelled out its proposals.

With the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled today to hold the first congressional hearings on gun violence since the Newtown tragedy, we offer four general guidelines for a national dialogue on sensible solutions to this deadly malady.
First, any legislation that is suggested should be broad-gauged. There is no one single cause of gun violence and no single solution. That will mean determining if there is any reason for weapons to have magazines that hold 30 rounds or more. It will mean assessing whether armor-piercing bullets — opposed by police chiefs around the country — should be legal. And it will mean considering strengthening background checks.
Gun advocates will say that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. And of course we must examine the long-term effects on our children of violent movies, television shows and video games. We must address gaps in our mental health system that leave potential killers unidentified and untreated, and this will require more financial resources. And we must strive to make our schools and public gathering places safer, perhaps through federal financing so local police forces can hire additional officers, as was done when the 1994 assault weapons ban was passed.

Second, any approach demands bipartisan support. This is not important just because of our divided government. Absent wide support, any laws passed now might well be rescinded once the partisan balance of power inevitably shifts. A broad-based approach could also help guarantee that any legislation would survive a constitutional challenge. That means that both gun-rights activists and the entertainment industry will have to moderate their positions.

Third, common sense should prevail. We must get away from a mind-set that has owners of firearms worried that “they are going to take our guns away.” The Second Amendment guarantees that won’t happen. Our nation has regulated various kinds of arms throughout history, and done so without violating the Second Amendment. We have, for example, restricted ownership of fully automatic weapons and grenade launchers.

Finally, each of us should look into our own heart to consider what type of nation we want to be. From members of the National Rifle Association to the most passionate gun-control advocates, no one wants to live in a country where innocent children are killed indiscriminately. This is a problem for all Americans — not just the government — and we all must be part of the solution.

That’s why we think parents should spend less time leaving their children alone playing shoot-’em-up video games and more time with them doing activities they both enjoy. This includes taking children into the country to hunt and to gain, as we did as boys, a love for the abundance and beauty of nature as well as a respect for the responsible and legitimate use of guns.
--------------------------------------
James A. Baker III was secretary of the Treasury from 1985 to 1988 and secretary of state from 1989 to 1992. Representative John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, is the dean of the House and currently the longest-serving member of Congress.
A version of this op-ed appeared in print on January 30, 2013, on page A27 of the New York edition with the headline: Bipartisan Hunting Buddies.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Frankly I like Newts article a good bit better,the Second Amendment has very little to do with "hunting" and a lot to do with protecting the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.Note no mention of "gun free zones"( a common location for every one of these tragedy's where the killers can attak unarmed people) in the Baker letter only "any reason to own a 30rd mag"(when all of these cowardly killers bring multiple weapons and mags)in Bakers just "compromise "

By: Newt Gingrich
1/30/2013 07:30 AM



Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) produced an impressive display of rifles in her Capitol Hill office last week.

They looked quite menacing despite exhibiting virtually no functional differences when compared with dozens of other popular rifles.

The weapons Sen. Feinstein discussed are already banned in Washington, where she staged her event, as well as in many other cities such as Chicago.

And yet these laws have done little to stop violent crime in these places, because the overwhelming majority of gun murders are committed with standard handguns.

The FBI does not keep statistics on homicides involving what the left calls “assault weapons,” a term invented to convince the public that the guns referred to are machine guns. The Bureau does, however, report that rifles were used in just 3.7 percent of gun homicides in 2011. (“Assault weapons” are typically rifles.)

But more than 70 percent of gun homicides involve handguns.

So when banning a fraction of rifles, which are used in a small fraction of murders, fails to stop the violence, the left will predictably rediscover that it is necessary to put more restrictions on handguns — which several cities attempted to ban outright, with no positive results, before the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional.

CNN’s Piers Morgan more or less conceded this desire when I was on his show last week when he was unable to draw a distinction between his rationale for banning “assault weapons” and the left’s historically documented urge to ban handguns.

We are correct to fear incrementalism when the burden of proof in the debate shifts from legislators convincing the people that a law can accomplish its proper aim, to the people having to persuade legislators that they should be permitted to keep certain weapons.

The left has grown fond of asking why Americans need more than 10 bullets in a magazine, or why we need the particular guns they call “assault weapons.”

But they don’t ask themselves the inverse of that question: Do mass shooters “need” high capacity magazines, or rifles with certain cosmetic styling, in order to commit their crimes?


Of course not. The deadliest mass shooter in U.S. history, who killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in 2007, used two handguns and a backpack full of 10 round magazines.

One of the Columbine shooters carried 13 10 round magazines with him.

There is no evidence that reloading frequency makes a significant difference in mass shootings as long as those you’re attacking are unarmed.

Appearing on a Sunday show last weekend, we were asked what if, hypothetically, the Connecticut shooter had walked into the school “with a baseball bat”?

Notice that we were not asked, “What if a school security guard had only had a gun?” (Incidentally, according to the FBI, blunt objects like baseball bats killed 50 percent more people in 2011 than did rifles.)

Feeling the need to “do something” after a tragedy like the one that occurred at Sandy Hook is certainly understandable. But we shouldn’t pass laws that punish law-abiding citizens, fail to deter or prevent crime, and do nothing to make us safer.

If we can win this debate, maybe the left will get around to asking why so many people are shooting each other in Chicago and Los Angeles, rather than obsessing over which particular guns they’re using to do it.


Hillary For Prison 2018
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Apparently the left wing news media has gone from tacit approval of voter fraud to altering 2nd Amendment related video to support their anti-gun agenda.
Jim


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/29/Media-Lies-About-Sandy-Hook-Victim-Being-Heckled


The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Read the Letter 1,100 Green Berets Signed for Protection of the 2nd Amendment

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/...-2nd-amendment/

The Special Operations Forces Report (SOFREP) called our attention to a 2,929-word letter signed by more than 1,000 Green Berets in support of protecting the Second Amendment and explaining why “all Americans should be concerned” about doing so themselves.


As experts in military weapons of all types, it is our considered opinion that reducing magazine capacity from 30 rounds to 10 rounds will only require an additional 6 -8 seconds to change two empty 10 round magazines with full magazines,” the letter reads. “Would an increase of 6 –8 seconds make any real difference to the outcome in a mass shooting incident? In our opinion it would not. Outlawing such ‘high capacity magazines’ would, however, outlaw a class of firearms that are ‘in common use’.”

They also point out in the Columbine shootings, gunman Eric Harris used a firearm in compliance with the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that used 10-round capacity magazines.

“[...] Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre’s aftermath.”

The letter states that it is “politically expedient” to pass more gun control laws in light of recent events in the name of protecting children, but “is the problem really guns?” That’s the million dollar question isn’t it?


Hillary For Prison 2018
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Poll: 67% of Americans Don't Believe Gun Ban Would Prevent Sandy Hook

According to a new Reason-Rupe poll released today, just 27% of Americans believe that an assault weapons ban would have helped prevent the tragedy at Sandy Hook in Newtown, CT. 67% of Americans believe that the ban, which expired in 2004, would not have prevented the tragic shooting. Overall, the poll finds Americans far more skeptical of gun control laws than the Democrats and media assume.

It should be noted that the Reason poll has a heavy Democrat tilt. 36% of respondents identify with the Democrat party, while only 22% identify as Republicans. Also, a majority of respondents, 54%, are not gun owners.

The Democrats have tried to paint supporters of gun rights as a "fringe" element of the public. The American public clearly does not agree with this assessment. The left, in its zeal for gun control, has run far further down-field than the American public on this issue. If they pursue this course, they will likely face severe headwinds going into 2014 elections

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/...vent-sandy-hook


Hillary For Prison 2018
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Statement at a Gun Violence Prevention Hearing in Hartfort,CT 1-28-2013.
Jim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyYYgLzF6zU&feature=youtu.be

I for one well remember these Korean merchants he refers to in Watts,CA who, armed with primarily AR15s, stood off hordes of rioters who wanted to burn their buildings to the ground.

Last edited by italiansxs; 01/30/13 06:19 PM.

The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,711
Likes: 730
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,711
Likes: 730
A rare case of a medico that is in agreement with the second amendment:

http://www.surgicalneurologyint.com/article.asp?issn=2152-7806;year=2013;volume=4;issue=1;spage=16;epage=16;aulast=Faria


Best,
Ted

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
They keep saying they want to keep "assault weapons off the streets" while going after semi auto's.It seems gun running in Fast and Furious is not the only problem in this administration :

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/31/atf-royally-screws-up-again-n1502004

You've probably heard the old joke about how the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms should be a convenience store not a federal agency, but the latest ATF screw up in Wisconsin proves they aren't even capable of doing that properly. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A store calling itself Fearless Distributing opened early last year on an out-of-the-way street in Milwaukee's Riverwest neighborhood, offering designer clothes, athletic shoes, jewelry and drug paraphernalia.

Those working behind the counter, however, weren't interested in selling anything.

They were undercover agents from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives running a storefront sting aimed at busting criminal operations in the city by purchasing drugs and guns from felons.

But the effort to date has not snared any major dealers or taken down a gang. Instead, it resulted in a string of mistakes and failures, including an ATF military-style machine gun landing on the streets of Milwaukee and the agency having $35,000 in merchandise stolen from its store, a Journal Sentinel investigation has found.

When the 10-month operation was shut down after the burglary, agents and Milwaukee police officers who participated in the sting cleared out the store but left behind a sensitive document that listed names, vehicles and phone numbers of undercover agents.

Last edited by Dave K; 01/31/13 09:26 AM.

Hillary For Prison 2018
Page 10 of 37 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 36 37

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.065s Queries: 35 (0.043s) Memory: 0.8838 MB (Peak: 1.8987 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 23:19:11 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS