ME
MemberOriginal Poster
Feb 1, 2013In the past few weeks, I have seen and participated in many discussions on the recent school shootings.
What I don’t understand is why Obama will go out on national television in a campaign like setting in Las Vegas and call for everyone to act, to be on his side to pass Gun Control legislation, but he doesn't go on national television to address the nation and ask for the people to help to end gun Violence. Why won’t he come out and say to the nation that no matter what Congress passes it doesn’t work if the States and the people don’t help to make the country a safer place.
Isn’t this supposed to be a nation that was created by the people, of the People by the People and for the people, and our politicians serve us not the other way around?
Why doesn’t Obama go on national T.V. and say;
“We will look at what we can do to strengthen our gun laws to make sure guns are not ending up in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill but you do not have to wait to act. You have the power to reduce gun accidents and gun crime by acting now to learn proper gun safety and storage. We could be doing things now like instituting the Eddie Eagle Program to teach k-4th Graders simple gun Safety;
If you see a gun:
STOP!
Don't Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.
You could be going online and finding out the best way to secure your firearms for what makes sense for your situation.
We could be requiring conflict resolution teaching in school to teach our children how to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence. Isn’t that supposed to be part of the Safe Schools initiative so kids can feel safe at school and not bullied, etc?
You could be calling on your States and legislatures to Comply with the NICS system and report convicted criminals, people deemed mentally unstable, report people convicted of drug violations, etc.
If you are the victim of a robbery and your guns are stolen report them to the Police so that Law enforcement will know there out there and you are no longer liable if that gun is used in a crime.
There are many, many things that as Citizens of the United States you could be doing now to help curb gun violence in the U.S..
You don’t need to wait for Congress to act or an Executive Order from me for something to be done.
This country is founded on the Principle that the people are intelligent and capable of determining for themselves how our government should work and what our laws should be. This country works when people are involved and taking responsibility for it. Ask yourself are you doing what you can to prevent gun violence or are you just waiting for the government to do something about it?
Here’s a website with xxxxx information on what you can be doing now. It covers proper gun safety, safety rules you can teach your children when they see a gun, how to properly store weapons when they are not in use, etc.â€
Not a bad speech huh?
Why is it that ending gun violence is only a Legislative issue and what matters is what they can get passed and turned into law and not about citizens themselves taking a role in our society?
There are millions of gun owners and groups that would be more than happy to help make the country safer and help reduce gun violence. Many are offered free of charge or very inexpensively. Lawful gun owners do not want guns in the hands of criminals and don’t like gun violence anymore than you do. They do not like seeing children killed by guns any more than you do.
Instead of attacking lawful gun ownership, trying to limit their rights and making them the scapegoats every time a psychopath with a gun kills a child, why aren't you asking law abiding gun owners for help?
What I don’t understand is why Obama will go out on national television in a campaign like setting in Las Vegas and call for everyone to act, to be on his side to pass Gun Control legislation, but he doesn't go on national television to address the nation and ask for the people to help to end gun Violence. Why won’t he come out and say to the nation that no matter what Congress passes it doesn’t work if the States and the people don’t help to make the country a safer place.
Isn’t this supposed to be a nation that was created by the people, of the People by the People and for the people, and our politicians serve us not the other way around?
Why doesn’t Obama go on national T.V. and say;
“We will look at what we can do to strengthen our gun laws to make sure guns are not ending up in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill but you do not have to wait to act. You have the power to reduce gun accidents and gun crime by acting now to learn proper gun safety and storage. We could be doing things now like instituting the Eddie Eagle Program to teach k-4th Graders simple gun Safety;
If you see a gun:
STOP!
Don't Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.
You could be going online and finding out the best way to secure your firearms for what makes sense for your situation.
We could be requiring conflict resolution teaching in school to teach our children how to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence. Isn’t that supposed to be part of the Safe Schools initiative so kids can feel safe at school and not bullied, etc?
You could be calling on your States and legislatures to Comply with the NICS system and report convicted criminals, people deemed mentally unstable, report people convicted of drug violations, etc.
If you are the victim of a robbery and your guns are stolen report them to the Police so that Law enforcement will know there out there and you are no longer liable if that gun is used in a crime.
There are many, many things that as Citizens of the United States you could be doing now to help curb gun violence in the U.S..
You don’t need to wait for Congress to act or an Executive Order from me for something to be done.
This country is founded on the Principle that the people are intelligent and capable of determining for themselves how our government should work and what our laws should be. This country works when people are involved and taking responsibility for it. Ask yourself are you doing what you can to prevent gun violence or are you just waiting for the government to do something about it?
Here’s a website with xxxxx information on what you can be doing now. It covers proper gun safety, safety rules you can teach your children when they see a gun, how to properly store weapons when they are not in use, etc.â€
Not a bad speech huh?
Why is it that ending gun violence is only a Legislative issue and what matters is what they can get passed and turned into law and not about citizens themselves taking a role in our society?
There are millions of gun owners and groups that would be more than happy to help make the country safer and help reduce gun violence. Many are offered free of charge or very inexpensively. Lawful gun owners do not want guns in the hands of criminals and don’t like gun violence anymore than you do. They do not like seeing children killed by guns any more than you do.
Instead of attacking lawful gun ownership, trying to limit their rights and making them the scapegoats every time a psychopath with a gun kills a child, why aren't you asking law abiding gun owners for help?
ReactReplySubscribe
Replies
- SO
SoupieFeb 7, 2013Yet you have no proposal for how to stop that or reduce the amount of gun deaths. Your answer is always more guns.
ReactReply - FF
FF32404Feb 7, 2013[quote]Yet you have no proposal for how to stop that or reduce the amount of gun deaths. Your answer is always more guns.[/quote]Mr. Soupie, actually you are correct! More guns in the hands of law abiding people is the answer, AND concentrating more on enforcing gun laws on the criminal element. The problem is that politicians focus only on removing guns from the hands of the law abiding and never focus on criminals. They are more interested in making criminals out of the law abiding than going after the real criminals. Almost 100% of the mass shootings occurred in areas that were deemed "Gun Free Zones" which means that only the law abiding complied, while the mass murderer disregarded it! In Portland, OR at the mall where that guy had an AR-15 and started shooting, the MSM spent a lot of time focusing on the reason why he didn't shoot more people was because the gun supposedly jammed but in actuality another mall shopper had a Glock .40 cal handgun pointed at him but did NOT fire. Right after this, the gunman shot himself. (NOTE, this is a common example of saving lives without a shot being fired)
An analogy that you will probably disagree with but I'm going to say it anyway is taking carjackings for example. Try to think like a bad guy for a second. (criminals are bad but generally not stupid) If you had two potential victims in a parking lot to jack, one was getting into a car with an NRA sticker on their back window and the other one has an Obama/Biden Sticker, which one do you think the car jacker would choose as the easier target? NOTE: the fact that someone is a member of the NRA and supports what the organization stands for does not mean that person with the sticker has a gun. Kind of like putting an ADT sign out front of your home, it's a deterrent.
I still challenge you to read More Guns, Less Crime by Lott, the evidence he uses is Not debatable, but I'm sure you will anyway, but it gives a great perspective on how legal gun ownership is a deterrent to crime. I'll also note that the New York newspaper who published all of the names and addresses of pistol permit holders in two NY counties pulled the map not because they had a change of heart about the gun owners, but because they were reminded that all of the other houses who didn't have guns were more vulnerable (including their own) to home invasions! This is a classic example of how trying to limit rights often backfires! There is a reason why they are called "Rights"ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 7, 2013[quote]As an outsider - Is it a requirement at gun shows and/or private sales to run the same checks as at a gun store?[/quote]Rene, to answer your question accurately, it depends on the states. There are a number of states which require paperwork and background check on ALL gun sales, while some only require it for handguns and some private sales are not interfered by the government. Our Federal and State governments like to use the term "Loophole" and "Straw Purchasers" just like a term they made up "Assault Weapons" but the fact is that, after the "Fast and Furious" Scandal in which our government provided thousands of Modern Sporting Rifles to the Mexican Drug Cartels which have been used in thousands of innocent deaths in Mexico and some in the US to push a strict and sweeping gun control agenda within the US and through the UN, it makes me wonder if the majority of the illegal gun trafficking going on in this country is coming from the same source but just being blamed on the Law Abiding. I'll also note that a large number of firearms that make it to the illegal gun trade are stolen from shipping companies such as UPS. The gangs put people on the inside stocking trucks and when they notice packaging that may be a firearm, they put them aside and hide them. The shipping companies have done more to crack down on this, but for a while, they were getting away with thousands of firearms each year this way. One more thing about "LoopHoles" The mother of all Loopholes is the criminal! They loophole themselves out of every law they come across and until they get caught, the criminal actions compound themselves! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that gun laws, gun control, bans and such only affect the law abiding. They have absolutely no effect on the criminal!ReactReply
- SOSoupieFeb 7, 2013
Sorry, but that really sounds like one of those crazy right wing conspiracy theories. Blame a delivery company. If you believe that more guns equals less crime, I cannot agree with you. But once again, no one is going to take your guns. You cannot believe that. Unless you, yourself are sporting a grenade launcher.
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 7, 2013
But wait. More guns is good, right? We should arm the children. But of course, teach them to shoot first.
ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 8, 2013[quote]Sorry, but that really sounds like one of those crazy right wing conspiracy theories. Blame a delivery company. If you believe that more guns equals less crime, I cannot agree with you. But once again, no one is going to take your guns. You cannot believe that. Unless you, yourself are sporting a grenade launcher.[/quote]Funny you accuse me of conspiracy theory when everything I said about "Fast and Furious" and UPS is true. I didn't say that UPS itself had anything directly to do with it, but their lack of security had a lot to do with it at the time. I'll add one more. Back in the 90's under President Clinton, the FBI intercepted a Chinese cargo ship at one of the California harbors which had on it thousands of AK-47 style weapons. These AK's were being smuggled into OUR country by China and their intended destination was the street gangs. One of the people involved in the operation was a close friend of the Clintons and spent time in the Lincoln Bedroom. This was swept under the rug though after this information was found out, much like "Fast and Furious" is being done now!
So no one is going to take our guns you say? That is definitely a common statement even said by many gun owners who act as "Sheep" of course, but since this President has taken office the Dept. of Homeland Security has classified any returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, ALL second Amendment supporters and Pro-Life Advocates as potential domestic terror threats! Couple that with the Agendas of Fast and Furious, their constant blaming of gun owners for the mass killings that have happened, their outright bans politicians have introduced on the Federal and State level, Gun Registration schemes being introduced, the UN Treaty which despite what you think you believe is UN control of our rights, and the 23 executive orders, the only thing standing in the way of total control is the 2nd Amendment itself along with the people. The intent is there and if anyone lets their guard down and just assumes it NOT going to happen, they have no one to blame but themselves if it does. You have no credibility with your grenade launcher comment. Back when the Constitution was written the closest thing to grenade launchers was cannons which were NOT small arms and neither are grenade launchers. They are explosive devices and Pro Second Amendment advocates are not talking about grenade launchers.ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 8, 2013
The U.S. is the biggest supplier of weapons to the world. That's not going to change anytime soon. It just isn't rational to think that guns will disappear from the U.S.
ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 8, 2013[quote]The U.S. is the biggest supplier of weapons to the world. That's not going to change anytime soon. It just isn't rational to think that guns will disappear from the U.S. [/quote]Excellent, we agree on something. I never said that guns would disappear, actually it's quite the opposite! If guns are banned, there of course will still be arms but in the wrong hands! The U.S. has most likely always been the largest manufacturer of firearms but now our government is arming the enemy whether it be Mexican Drug Cartels, Illegal Aliens, Street Gangs or Al Qaeda in Libya. All while trying to ban them from people who are not inclined to commit violence with them.ReactReply
- SOSoupieFeb 10, 2013
Yes, FF, but there is no politics involved in arming an enemy. Reagan gave Iran weapons, several dictators in Central America, and Afghan "freedom fighters". Yet the right reveres him and despises Obama.
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 10, 2013
The Los Angeles police riddled a vehicle with two Asian women in it who were delivering newspapers in their pursuit of a fugitive. They were both killed. But that's just "collateral damage", right?
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 10, 2013
Keep posting guys. It's just another nail in the federal Repupnican coffin. Even Karl Rove wants rid of you now. You worship Reagan, but you had no problem with the firearm trafficking that he did.
ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 10, 2013[quote]Keep posting guys. It's just another nail in the federal Repupnican coffin. Even Karl Rove wants rid of you now. You worship Reagan, but you had no problem with the firearm trafficking that he did.[/quote]This is a prime example of how you do not get your facts straight. The two women were shot but did not die yet. In fact they are rightfully attaining a lawyer as we speak to sue the PD! The incident in LA is much bigger than just some cop gone rogue so you might want to lay off that one until all the facts come out. But if you do want to keep mentioning it, the Ex-cop is a former military guy but according to his Manifesto (which I encourage you to read all 35 pages) he was a left wing democrat who adored Obama, Loves Hillary Clinton, Hates the NRA and believes our Government should ban ALL guns! In fact if you search, you will find that most of the mass murderers that have recently hit this country in the past few years have closer ties to the Democrat party than any right wing group of any sort!
As for Reagan I respected him, and liked him for many reasons, but not once have I announced my support here or anywhere else for him providing arms to anyone that you mention. But once again, we have actions of this current president that have directly affected American lives and that is what I'm talking about! Ultimately the stand down order in Benghazi came from his office and he has the blood of those 4 Americans on his hands! And the two border patrol agents as well as thousands of Innocent Mexican civilians also have blood on his hands! But instead of condemning it, as a progressive you must bring up things that went one before you were born! IT's like 20 years from now, you will still be blaming Bush for everything and some kids that haven't even been born yet will be also.ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 10, 2013
It's not me, but history that will blame Bush for unnecessary wars that did nothing. Was attacking Iraq the first and best answer to 9/11. Wait, I forgot, bad intelligence, right? That Dick Cheney ordered.
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
And yet you still have no problems with republicans arming the enemy FF? It's only the democrats who shouldn't do it?
ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 11, 2013[quote]And yet you still have no problems with republicans arming the enemy FF? It's only the democrats who shouldn't do it?[/quote]You either didn't read my post entirely or skipped through it to find the "Blame Bush" part!ReactReply
- SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
And you skip through history to the blame Obama for the everything bad part.
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
An excellent example of idiocy and insulting rhetoric ^
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
Said by a man in Britain. Don't you have a kitten pic to express your opinion? Come on. I know that you do.
ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
I'm curious. Do you right wing republicans and conservatives think that they would support your nudism? You would be considered a pervert, like a gay or lesbian or minority. Why would you want to belong to a club that wouldn't have you as a member?
ReactReply - FFFF32404Feb 11, 2013[quote]I'm curious. Do you right wing republicans and conservatives think that they would support your nudism? You would be considered a pervert, like a gay or lesbian or minority. Why would you want to belong to a club that wouldn't have you as a member?[/quote]I've got news for you, there are more conservative nudists than you think! Liberal nudists falsely assume that nudism is a liberal lifestyle and they seem to want to claim it as their own, much like liberals assume that gun ownership is a conservative lifestyle so to speak, however both are Freedom Issues and everyone on both sides of the aisle should be embracing both or at least embracing that both are rights that no one should want to take away. Liberals also falsely assume that it's the democrats that are on their side on the nudist issue much like they assume that Obama is Pro-Gay! He struggled with his decision to come out in favor of gay marriage. He lies about everything else, why would you think they he wouldn't lie about this one too. You all have to remember that at any given point in time, Politicians weigh the votes and timing of those votes! They vote the political wind and if it's the right time, they speak to make certain groups happy but will no sooner stab them in the back as soon as they turn around. I remember about 15 years ago a female nudist in Michigan I believe ran for Congress on the GOP ticket. She made it very clear that she was a nudist however she didn't win overall. She wasn't afraid to tell people. There is definitely something that the nudist world can learn from the 2nd Amendment debate. On the gun side it's a bit more easy to understand because it's specifically mentioned in the Constitution and most state Constitutions, but the right of being nude isn't mentioned, but I do know one thing for sure, if we lose our 2nd Amendment right, all other rights can be kissed goodbye.ReactReply
- SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013You are in no danger or losing your second amendment rights. Think about it. The U.S. loves it guns. Both parties. It's not going anywhere, so you don't need to be an alarmist or extremist about it. There will always be some group like the Westboro Baptist church who are stockpiling AK 47s, and you can always hide out with them.
Please remember, Gassy, I'm supposed to be on shun mode. If you would stop drinking so much, you would remember that.ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 11, 2013
Well, we have no idea if you are even a man. You're not certified and too ashamed to reveal any part of your life or information on here. What claim do you have to be a nudist? That just suggests a coward to me, or someone who is here to perv. And I'm sure that you enjoy doing that.
ReactReply - MA
ManOfWicklowFeb 14, 2013[quote]I have gotten to a point that if the Idiot From The North opens his mouth about our politics down here, I do not read his views at all, and usually not even the forum.[/quote]Same here, Razorback, I have stopped reading his posts, I just skip down to the next person. If only the few people on here who still foolishly take the bait, had enough sense to ignore him, then perhaps the forums would become enjoyable once more.
If people feel the uncontrollable urge to answer his BS, then at least do so without direct reply to him. By all means post a remark if need be, but only in conversation with another member.ReactReply - SOSoupieFeb 14, 2013
Because he's a dolt. Don't you get it yet?
ReactReply