1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Must ban all sharp objects before it's too late...

Discussion in 'Society and Culture' started by Greg, Dec 15, 2012.

  1. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    Well, there's one little problem with this exchange that isn't being told.

    The issue was manufactured by the media. He wasn't being heckled. After over 15 minutes of him giving his opinion on the topic, he asked those in attendance whether there was anyone in the room that could give him a reason. He had actually asked it a couple of times throughout the monologue. The media took a 20 second segment of a 15 minute monologue and used it to try to paint the 2nd Amendment advocates as heartless. He asked, and then he said nobody in the room could tell him, at which time they responded. Then they were told to be quiet or they would be removed. Okay, they were quiet and he went on. He even said they were all entitled to their opinion and he respected them, and they continued to listen respectfully.

    It's one thing to heckle someone. It's quite another when someone misrepresents your viewpoints, saying you can't answer something.

    Look at the video Tom posted. Then watch the whole thing. Then tell me this wasn't a prototypical MSNBC manufactured controversy, designed to paint the 2nd Amendment advocates as assholes.

    Don't get me wrong, I feel terrible for the guy, and I understand his grief is driving him to do and say the things he is. I respect his argument, from his viewpoint. I almost wouldn't expect any other position from him.
    Sierra Mike likes this.
  2. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    I was just coming here to post that, saw it on Twitchy.

    GOD DAMN, the media sucks ASS on this! And I fucking fell for it!
  3. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    Dude, it's not going to be the last time one of us falls for this kind of misinformation. They're pretty good at their propaganda.
  4. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    They're fucking artists at it, which is why I fucking hate artists and wish they'd all just starve to death, already.

    Oh no, wait--news anchors and special segment reporters earn over 500 grand a year. I guess starvation's out.
  5. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    Told ya! :p
  6. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    And CNN jumps on the bandwagon citing flawed studies and numbers.

    Those numbers include accidental deaths and suicide, yet CNN would have you believe that those numbers are murders.
  7. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Funny how cigarettes cause more than ten times the amounts of death, but nobody wants to go after those--too much tax revenue, I wonder? :D
  8. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    Then we have this little gem from Bloomberg. And while they do give a tiny little nod to suicides being the biggest death cause, it doesn't stop them from pressing on with the agenda.
  9. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    Yeah, that's wholesale two-faced right there. Liberals support the right to suicide, but want to count suicide as gun violence in order to ban guns.
  10. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    I've also noticed that CNN wastes absolutely no time in reporting about ANY shooting.
  11. Greg

    Greg Full Member

    I had to laugh at the articles mentioning that one of the causes of decreased traffic deaths is seat-belt laws. I'm pretty sure most Americans don't even remember when cars came without seat-belts because they weren't born then. (I think it was like the '60s...)

    Suicide shouldn't be counted in deaths from firearms. That's ridiculous although of course I'm preaching to the choir.

    With all the talk bouncing around I've been doing a lot of thinking about the liberals and their craziness about firearms. (We've all been thinking about that.) It occurred to me today that they want to take away all the guns, but they're also talking about arming teachers, allowing some of them to carry concealed weapons in case their school is attacked.

    Who was that stupid celebrity, the one that was vociferously anti-gun (?) yet she was followed around 24/7 by her armed guards. Rosie O'Donnell or something like that?

    The problem with arguing with liberals about firearms is that when they get on the subject their brains start misfiring and they go all illogical and their thinking turns into MUST TAKE GUNS AWAY, MUST TAKE GUNS AWAY, MUST TAKE GUNS AWAY......

    There's always going to be another shooting because humans are killer apes. It is our nature to kill. We're going to do it with guns or with nuclear weapons or with sharp sticks or with our bare hands and teeth.

    If they take the guns away people will just use something else. I took a couple of years of chemistry in college and I can think of dozens, perhaps hundreds of ways to kill people with commonly available chemicals. And if nothing else works, use a can of gas and toss a match on your victim. What, are they going to ban gas because it kills people? (Actually it does. Think of the improvement in traffic death statistics if gasoline was illegalized.)

    The whole issue is illogical. That's why I started the topic with a reference to sharp sticks. There are countless ways to kill people, and many of them are capable of killing mass numbers of people. There isn't any way to outlaw everything that hurts people.

    If they really want to do something effective they should spend whatever it takes to implement a federal instant gun background check system, one where a firearm dealer can run a check right on the spot to determine if the purchaser should be sold a weapon.

    In fact how about a federal instant "right to work" system? And enforce all employers to check every prospective employee for legal work status before hiring them. That one thing would solve 95% of the illegal immigration problem. Just make it impossible for illegal aliens to get legitimate jobs.

    Well I digress. There isn't any way to logically discuss firearms issues with liberals.
  12. Kluge

    Kluge Observing your world for over 50 years

    I don't know how to make a link with tapatalk, but google up 'cbs news atf gun checka low tech operation'.
    Thanks to some congress critters who've passed of old age, it is unlawful for a federal agency to maintain a database of private gun owners. Sounds like a fantasy, no?
    A database of citizens and green cards surely exists already.
  13. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Days later, Yahoo is finally reporting on the bogus heckling. With clenched teeth and elevated blood pressure, I'm sure.
  14. BigDeputyDog

    BigDeputyDog Straight Shootin Admin Staff Member

    So... this week we get this little gem...

    Information for members and retirees. We have checked with the New York State troopers Assn. and this is accurate information.

    Changes in New York Gun Laws 01/17/2013

    This alert is to advise members that recent changes to firearms laws in New York may impact active and retired officers visiting the State and carrying concealed firearms under the auspices of the Law Enforcement Officers' Safety Act (LEOSA).

    New York State law prohibits the possession of magazines holding more than seven (7) rounds. The exemption provided by the LEOSA from State and local prohibitions on the carriage of concealed firearms does NOT exempt active and retired officers from State or local laws regulating magazines. It is unlawful for out-of-State active or retired law enforcement officers to possess a magazine which is capable of holding more than seven (7) rounds in the State of New York and you could face a criminal charge. It is our understanding that the prohibition on magazines went into effect immediately.

    While the National Legislative Office has not done a full legal analysis of the new laws, it is very clear that this provision in the new laws will have an immediate effect on members traveling to or through the State of New York. In addition, retired law enforcement officers living in New York--even those who have retired or separated from their agency in good standing in the State of New York--may also be affected by the ban on magazines capable of holding more than seven (7) rounds.

    Peachy... Just Peachy... *SMH*

  15. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    They are castrating the people we SHOULD be the one's able to carry.
  16. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Apparently illegally, as well...there's some indication that Cuomo contravened NYS's own state constitution by disallowing the public the opportunity to examine and comment upon the so-called state-level weapons ban the legislators passed.
  17. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    It's my understanding that LEOSA overrides any state law that attempts to limit the law. Am I wrong in that aspect?
  18. BigDeputyDog

    BigDeputyDog Straight Shootin Admin Staff Member

    In all of the research and readings I have done on The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, I've yet to find any references to magazine capacity. It states that we CAN carry in any of the 50 states and districts, exempting qualified active and retired officers from local and state prohibitions on concealed carry.

    In other words, we can carry but we don't have any guidelines set forth in the Act to govern how many rounds...

    Perhaps the bill should be updated??

  19. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    I don't think the law was enacted with the thought some states would try to do an end run around it. One would think that if the firearm can be considered a "duty weapon", there'd be nothing the state could do to do an end run around the federal law.

    I guess what needs to happen is a challenge in the courts.

Share This Page