Liars and Cowards
"We've been betrayed by liars and cowards. It's shameful."
President Barack Obama
17 April 2013
 |
| Ana Marquez-Greene, age 6 |
MSNBC, 18 April 2013
KEY PHRASE: "....moving toward extinction." Something I've been saying for a couple of years now. It's nice to know that people are beginning to catch up. As you're probably aware, Joe Scarborough is the conservative, former congressman from Florida. I have to admit that old Joe has grown on me in the last few years. He's still an insufferable gasbag, but a quite likeable and (at times) agreeable one. The first piece I ever wrote on this site nearly seven years ago was called, "George W. Bush: The Last Republican President". Mark my words, boys and girls. Mark my words. Listen to those pretty chimes of doom.
 |
| Catherine Hubbard, age 6 |
 |
| Caroline Previdi, age 6 |
I don't need to answer that question, do I? Oh what the heck, I'll answer it just for shits and giggles:
Four months and four days ago, twenty little boys and girls, and six of the women whose job it was to educate and protect them, were massacred like rabid cattle by some mentally deranged freak with an arsenal of rapid-fire killing machines. A bill to ban these lethal weapons was proposed by Senator Diane Feinstein of California. It was killed about as rapidly as those poor children in Newtown, Connecticut. Yesterday's defeat of the Background Checks legislation - which would not have made a bit of difference in the case of Adam Lanza by the way - is the last and best bit of evidence that can be offered with a straight face that the "lawmakers" that defeated it represent the financial interests of the NRA and the gun industry. They're certainly not there to do right by your children.
As the late, great Frank Zappa once brilliantly intoned:
They're just lookin' out for Number One
And Number One ain't you
You ain't even Number Two....
 |
| Noah Pozner, age 6 |
What can you do? Nothing really. This is the situation we'll have to live with - or at least until 2014 when some of these assholes will be up for reelection. Until then we might as well batten down the hatches, ay? Just grin and bear it. And while we're at it we can conjure up some REALLY goofy dark comedy out of this hopeless situation. Mass murder can be quite a humorous thing if handled in the right way. If you want to know what I'm talking about here, just go out and rent yourselves a copy of the film, Doctor Strangelove. Or better still, listen the lyrics of the old Monty Python tune: Always Look on the Bright Side of Life:
`
Life's a piece of shit
When you look at it
Life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true
You'll see it's all a show
Keep 'em laughing as you go
Just remember that the last laugh is on you!
 |
| Jack Pinto, age 6 |
 |
| Allison Wyatt, age 6 |
 |
| Andrew Wheeler, age 6 |
None of the little boys and girls who were murdered in cold blood at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012 believed their lives to be "a piece of shit". They were wrong of course - terribly wrong. They were as wrong as they would ever be during their short time on this earth. They were twenty little pieces of shit - worthless and expendable shit. That was proven for all time and eternity yesterday, April 17, 2013, on the floor of the United States senate.
Hang your head and weep for your country.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
SUGGESTED LISTENING:
Now or Never
by The Spirit Choir
People of the world, please listen to your souls
We can change the times to a century of hope
'Cause dream you dream alone is only a dream
But dream we dream together is reality....
Always Look on the Bright Side of Life
by Monty Python
(sung by Eric Idle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw1nFmNsHp4
Always look on the bright side of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath....
Always Look on the Bright Side of Life
by Monty Python
(sung by Eric Idle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw1nFmNsHp4
Always look on the bright side of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath....
posted by Tom Degan @ 1:13 PM
36 comments
36 Comments:
Thanks Tom. Very sad indeed. Removal from the US Senate is what it is going to take. Starting with your ol' buddy Mitch McConnell.
you should check out Mitch McConnel's Facebook page - Teammitch.
There were some wonderful comments from Kentucky residents that lead me to believe his days are numbered. I will not hold my breath and I will knock on wood - just sayin' - maybe this has put the nail in the coffin of the Republican Party.
Sad and unbelievable. We can only hope that McConnell and the rest of these rectal cavities are voted out of office in the next election.
read this again. I think all you would have had to do is post the 26 pictures of the murdered people - no words necessary.
Sad and unbelievable.
Not all Democrats voted for the Bill.
Should have gotten 60 votes on party ID alone.
But just like the reasons for the bombing in Boston will be blamed on the GOP, the defeat of today's Bill is blamed 100% on the GOP.
No Partisanship on this blog.
Boston News Update per AP
The suspects were identified by law enforcement officials and a family member as Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, brothers from a Russian region near Chechnya, which has been plagued by an Islamic insurgency that has carried out deadly bombings.
Islam projecting peace and love once again.
So sorry David Sirota.
The reason the 2nd Amend. exists is so that people can protect themselves when peace soliders, like those above, stop by your home, or other unconstitutional visitors.
Strangling the rights of innocent people may make you feel good but its nothing more than that. Criminals will be criminals and the laws promoted by the Senate will do nothing to prevent these crimes.
Why hasn't Obama flown in the grieving gang mothers from hometown Chicago on Air Force 1. It's because the libs need to keep that festering problem as an emblematic need for their control agenda. The ends justify the means, I suppose.
Mitch McConnell doesn't control all Repubs or the Dems that didn't support this legislation. Mitch or Ashley, wouldn't have made any difference.
Ok, we've heard the emotional name-calling. Well, the Republicans, anyway. The Dems largely got off easy - and their issue was purely political - worse in my book. Anyway...
What we haven't heard is a coherent argument as to how the proposed legislation would prevent mass-murders. I'd suggest you do some research into the subject before offering up what will be shown to be non-fact-based speculation. Because history bears out that it likely wouldn't - at all.
Until you can show even a modicom of probability that it would, I question your critical thinking skills and, frankly, your motives.
Chuck Morre, "No Partisanship on this blog"? Who said there had to be? Most of your comments can not be taken to be bipartisan.
I would like to remind you that this is Tom's blog and he gets to choose the subject and state his thoughts on it as do do his readers and responders. If you are unhappy with this, then by all means start your own blog and let us respond to it as we will.
Good luck in your quest for a coherent argument supporting how the failed proposed gun legislation would have prevented mass murders.
Great post, Tom. You say the things I would want to say if I had a blog - so thank you.
I somewhat agree with Harley A... this piece of legislation was not the be-all-end-all on this subject. HOWEVER if it had passed we may have seen a loosening of the NRA stranglehold on our elected officials. The NRA won and we the electorate lost...again. Plain and simple.
Peace!
Jo in Arizona
Terrorists, the mentally ill, and the criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
And this is what paranoid mental illness looks like:
the reasons for the bombing in Boston will be blamed on the GOP
Look out! Here come Obama's black helicopters to take you guns. Defend your liberty! Arm yourself against the Federal Government. So what if Tim McVeigh thought the same way as you do?
"the NRA stranglehold on our elected officials. The NRA won and we the electorate lost...again."
I guess you do not realize this, but a lot of the electorate are gun owners, or NRA members or do not want the laws changed about gun ownership. So to claim that the NRA won and the electorate lost is not true. As long as you believe that your position about gun laws is the majority view, you will see your losses as the work of a secrete, vote stealing that wins only because of underhanded means, you will continue to lose.
When you face the truth, as shown by a recent Gallop poll that only 4% of Americans consider stronger gun laws as important, you will stop blaming the NRA boggy man and realize your position simply is not supported by the majority of Americans. Your job therefore is to find a way to increase that number from 4% to 51%. Then passage of stronger gun laws will be a breeze.
When you face the truth, as shown by a recent Gallop poll that only 4% of Americans consider stronger gun laws as important,
Honesty is just not that important to someone under the delusion that only they know the truth.
“When you face the truth, as shown by a recent Gallup poll.”
”Only 4% of Americans say that gun violence or gun issues constitute the most important problem facing the country today,
In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms, up from 43% in 2011. “
If this is not a snapshot of the “Right” mentality, I don’t what is.
Terrorists, the mentally ill, and the criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
Were you really 'surprised?' I wasn't.
We are a selfish nation--mean spirited and hateful to the core.
We are a nation against the ACA. After all the 'facts' and numbers and ideological fumblings of the would-be 'Joe Six-Pack' pundits; what it really comes down to is that 40 million people can go to the Doctor and that means you and I might have to wait.
Selfishness.
Everything from school lunches, to meals on wheels, to medicaid, to birth control has come under fire as "socialism," because we're too cheap to help out those less fortunate. Selfishness.
...and on the 'gun' issue, after you scrape away all the bogus "Red Dawn" scenarios, discover that all the gun owners who are fearful of criminals don't even live in high crime rate areas, and the bullshit Constitution / faux-Minute-Man-masturbation session...
...it all boils down to: People who own guns don't want ANY limitation on their guns. They don't have a very good reason for this. They just like their guns--a lot.
...more than 20 grade school children they never met.
Did any expect the NRA NOT to lie? They've been distorting facts since 2008.
Liberals lost this one. We can blame the NRA all we want, but WE lost this one. I follow "The Sandy Hook Promise" on Facebook and what a useless-liberal-joke this non-profit is! They're going on about songs writting in memorial of the massacre, talking about 'fund-raisers' for scholarships, book drives, acts of kindness, and 8' x 6' granite memorial from Maine, and the cop who dresses up as a (I shit you not rubber duck and wears a puppet on one hand to entertain children!
It might astound the Sandy Hook Promise to know that dead children can't hear songs or read books and that scholarships are only good if the kids live long enough to graduate. And while granite monuments are 'nice,' unless they plan on hiding behind that particular monolith during the next massacre--who cares?!? The cop and the duck outfit literally made me laugh out loud at the absurdity of it.
Meanwhile...the NRA and the pro-gun crowd gathered, marched, and protested --town by town, county by county...
Liberals wrote songs....
I've begun to dislike Obama. He isn't the person I need him to be and I realize that is unfair. But my State of the Union would have been MUCH different.
Again, liberals are too worried about 'offending' people. In this case: gun-owners. Well...most of your gun-owners are assholes. Is that a surprise to anyone? Safe, sane gun-owners 'get-it.' They understand the concerns and they mourn these tragedies; sadly they are a rare minority.
Fuck 'em!
My State of the Union would have had crime scene and autopsy photos facing the joint session of Congress and that useless Supreme Court. I would've given LaPierre something to scream about. I'd roll out taxes on everything from hunters, to gun-ranges, to private security guards--from A to Z--and I'd even registration for fucking NERF guns.
We'd bargain from there...any 'fund-raising' would be for plane tickets for those 'Americans' who were afraid their government would 'turn on them.'
We lost the argument by being too nice, civil, and rational. We forgot that the American audience is a bunch of morons. (Don't believe me? Check your TV guide and see what 'entertains us!')
Since December 14th, not one Lib has pieced together the number of shootings, 'family-cides,' and would be shootings that occurred because a "responsible law-abiding" gun-owner didn't lock up their gun from their own crazy kid.
Instead, we allowed the NRA and their cohorts to play the mystic shell game and conjure criminals from every corner or our neighborhoods.
We lost this one.
Jay
Loraxlog.blogspot.com
What ever you say Dave, now about Harley's challenge, are
you going to have a coherent argument supporting how the failed proposed gun legislation would have prevented mass murders?
It's time to investigate the NRA. We need a kind of a McCarthy style hearing to scrap the surface off this rathole . . . Problem is: Can the US Congress afford to investigate itself?!!
What ever you say Dave
There you go. You're welcome for this, and the many other times, your "facts" needed correcting.
When you want to "face the truth" read what I write.
As for Harley's question. There is little we can do to prevent mass murder short of imposing a police state. But that is no excuse to not do what little we can, is it?
If on-line and gun show background checks dissuade some criminals or unstable people from owning AR-15's then that is a good thing, right?
What's your problem with it. Before it became a political power game for LaPierre he is on record supporting background checks. But in typical Right Wing fashion, as soon as Democrats, or especially Obama, support a GOP idea, then we see the GOP/NRA disavow their stated positions.
When will we see a coherent argument for that behavior?
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that?
What ever you think Dave is ok by me, it doesn't change the reality that you are wrong, again. And I disagree with you.
you are wrong, again. And I disagree with you.
LOL! You disagree with Gallup and me.
You: When you face the truth, as shown by a recent Gallop (sic) poll that only 4% of Americans consider stronger gun laws as important,
Gallup:
”Only 4% of Americans say that gun violence or gun issues constitute the MOST IMPORTANT problem facing the country today,
In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms, up from 43% in 2011. “
Yes, Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms.
Looks like you are wrong again. You are in the minority again. And I disagree with you again.
And you misrepresented Gallup. That’s just what your cult wants you to think. When will you face the truth?
You: Your job therefore is to find a way to increase that number from 4% to 51%
What does 58% mean in your cult? Where is that “reality”?
By disagreeing with me you also need to disagree with reality. But your cult reality is all you have.
LaPierre is on record supporting background checks. But in typical Right Wing fashion, as soon as Democrats, or especially Obama, support a GOP idea, then we see the GOP/NRA disavow their stated positions.
When will we see a coherent argument for that behavior?
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that?
You’d better show us the “reality” where I am wrong, sport. Otherwise everyone here will know you are full of lies, misinformation and deceit...or just another ignorant dupe of a cult.
LOL! As if anyone here has EVER agreed with your extremist radical Right claptrap.
But you are hilarious. Even the poll you refer to contradicts your gibberish.
Such a clown.
I found this on the thread before this one on Tom's blog. Dave,
how do you like your crow served, fried or baked?
Only 4 percent of Americans think guns and gun control are an important problem facing the country, according to Gallup, and far more Americans are concerned about the economy, unemployment and the federal debt.
In its poll from Apr. 4-7, Gallup surveyed 1,005 adults by telephone and asked, “What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?”
Respondents answered in the following order:
Economy in general 24%
Unemployment/Jobs 18%
Dissatisfaction with Government 16%
Federal budget deficit/Federal debt 11%
Healthcare 6%
Ethical/Moral/Family decline 5%
Immigration/Illegal aliens 4%
Education 4%
Guns/Gun control 4%
Situation with North Korea 4%
Lack of Money 3%
Welfare 2%
Lack of respect for each other 2%
Poverty/Hunger/Homelessness 2%
Foreign aid/Focus overseas 2%
Taxes 2%
Despite the Obama administration’s strong push for more gun control legislation, few Americans are concerned about the issue.
As Gallup reports, “Few Americans mention guns or immigration as the most important problems facing the nation today, despite the current attention lawmakers in Washington are giving to these issues. The economy still dominates as the top concern, followed by jobs and dissatisfaction with the general way in which Congress and the government work.
Boy you showed me...Just what I showed you...except for the part you cult won't let you read.
Gallup:
”Only 4% of Americans say that gun violence or gun issues constitute the MOST IMPORTANT problem facing the country today,
In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms, up from 43% in 2011."
"Yes, Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms.
LaPierre is on record supporting background checks. But in typical Right Wing fashion, as soon as Democrats, or especially Obama, support a GOP idea, then we see the GOP/NRA disavow their stated positions.
When will we see a coherent argument for that behavior?
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that?
You’d better show us the “reality” where I am wrong, sport."
You failed again.
But that's ok, we know you cannot think for yourself. You cannot recognize the 58%.
The way I see it, your only argument is to call me commie or some such thing. Better attack the messenger when he says stuff counter to your indoctrination.
No Dave, I did not misrepresented Gallup. I presented Gallup exactly as they published their poll. You are just having a hard time dealing with how fast opinions on this subject have changed.
"There is little we can do to prevent mass murder short of imposing a police state. But that is no excuse to not do what little we can, is it?" Dave Dubya.
What you simple do not understand Dave, is the majority of Americans do not want new laws pasted that do not fully correct the intended problem. The books are full of such laws. Have laws stopped illegal border crossings? Have laws stopped poverty? Have laws stopped hunger? No they haven't. So why pass another law that you admit will, "short of a police state will do little"?
I believe it is because liberals are all about "doing something", and feeling good about themselves, for their support of the new law that does not fix the problem. They can always say, "well at least I tried". But as you admitted, the problem does not go away. But a new law does restrict the liberty of the lawful citizen, while as you just said, does very little towards correcting the problem. Doesn't that sound a little like a police state? Reduction of liberty for the lawful, while the unlawful still have their lawless liberty?
There are only two ways to to prevent mass murders or any murder by a firearm.
1. Repeal the 2nd Amendment and confiscate all firearms from every citizen. This however will not prevent stabbing murders or murder by baseball bat, etc. Killing will still occur. But, "we have to do something". Right?
The 2nd way would be for a complete moral change in every American regardless if a gun owner or not, to fear the results of breaking the 6th Commandment. IE Fear the consequences breaking God's law, not fear of man's punishment, but the fear the punishment of God.
I do not see that happening, ever. After all the placement of the 10 Commandment in a government building or public school is a violation of separation of church and state. And and we cant have that, can we?
So Dave, the blaming the NRA, or the GOP or certain selected Democrats for the failure to pass a law that wouldn't have done much to stop murders by firearms, is just an exercise to feel morality superior. I like you, want to feel morally superior, but the truth is, none of us by our own efforts or merit are superior. We are all capable of violating at the minimum, the laws of man on a daily basis. And we do. So what would a new law do to stop us from what is our daily habit?
If you can find it I recommend reading the book, "Knowing Man, by J.I.Packer.
Dave, stop wasting your time with Chuck Morre. He is a fool and an idiot and will twist facts anyway that he pleases. With regard to the Gallup poll about guns, he is too stupid to even know how to correctly read it. He merely sees what he wants to see. But thank goodness so far he has not waved the abortion flag. Just a matter of time before he drags that out, I guess.
I disagree, as long as a Conservative is debating without insulting anyone, he should have the same respect he shows others.
Lucille,
You’re right. I was just having some sport with him because he acts such a fool and an idiot, but most of you may not share my sense of humor.
I’m done playing with him after this one last time. Thank you for putting up with my somewhat sick humor and entertainment.
James,
It’s not debating. Debate requires a mutual acceptance of definitions of terms in addition to answers and questions from both sides.
We don’t need to look far for insult, accusation and condescension that have nothing to do with the subject.
But just like the reasons for the bombing in Boston will be blamed on the GOP, the defeat of today's Bill is blamed 100% on the GOP.
It's because the libs need to keep that festering problem as an emblematic need for their control agenda. The ends justify the means, I suppose.
I believe it is because liberals are all about "doing something", and feeling good about themselves, for their support of the new law that does not fix the problem.
Now:
=====
Mr. “Misrepresenter”,
No Dave, I did not misrepresented Gallup.
Denial or exclusion of the fact “Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms, up from 43% in 201,” is what misrepresent means.
In the real world of evidence, logic, reason, and other stuff outside the bubble world of your cult, you misrepresented Gallup.
What you simple do not understand Dave, is the majority of Americans do not want new laws pasted that do not fully correct the intended problem.
Who says? The Gallop poll you misrepresented?
Yes, Gallup found 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms.
Wanna bet 10,000 bucks? Guess who’s famous for offering that regular guy bet?
Could that be because I don’t know how to “thimk” like you?
What a clown!
Here’s another of your jokes:
“blaming the NRA, or the GOP or certain selected Democrats for the failure to pass a law is ‘just an “exercise to feel morality superior”.
Is that what your cult calls accurately assessing reality? “Morality superior”. Priceless. Now you’ve accused me of having no morality AND wanting to feel “morality superior”.
That is hilarious. Typical contradictions of a hypocrite and liar, but very funny.
Also very funny:
Doesn't that sound a little like a police state?
Background checks? Like a police state??
LOL!!!
Only a clown would joke that background checks for gun show and internet firearms purchases “sound like a police state”. Really.
And did you know...
LaPierre is on record supporting background checks. You never acknowledge a very important point. Was he at one time a commie like me and most of the rest of the country?
You got some explaining to do son. How can you swallow both lines from your leader? That is classic authoritarian leader/follower behavior. Not to mention hypocritical and dishonest.
So while you read once again that LaPierre.... is.... on... record... supporting... background... checks, I’ll ask again:
In typical Right Wing fashion, as soon as Democrats, or especially Obama, support a GOP idea, then we see the GOP/NRA disavow their stated positions.
When will we see a coherent argument for that behavior?
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that?
No answer? Of course not. Cult rolls never answer questions, nor recognize the obvious evidence against their indoctrination and dishonesty.
As I said, you’d better show us the “reality” where I am wrong, sport. You failed again.
But let’s be of good cheer. While you utterly fail at reality, you succeed most humorously with your comedy of errors.
Now go have a nightcap, you've earned it.
I didn't pen this
Found it on the net.
Here is a gun.
It has an amazing language all its own.
It delivers unmistakable ultimatums.
It is the last word.
A simple, little human forefinger can tell a terrible story with it.
Hunger, fear, revenge, robbery hide behind it.
It is the claw of the jungle made quick and powerful.
It is the club of the savage turned to magnificent precision.
It is more rapid than any judge or court of law.
It is less subtle and treacherous than any one lawyer or ten.
When it has spoken, the case can not be appealed to the supreme court, nor any mandamus nor any injunction nor any stay of execution in and interfere with the original purpose.
And nothing in human philosophy persists more strangely than the old belief that God is always on the side of those who have the most revolvers.
Lucille is onto something. A lot of people on this site allow the the trolls to dominate the discussion by responding to them. Ignore them. It's the easiest thing in the world to do. It's one thing to engage in an honest debate. But when they change the topic of the conversation, we do ourselves a disservice by engaging them.
What ever you say Dave, what ever you say. Hope it makes you feel better knowing you wanted a law passed that by your own words wouldn't do much in the way of stopping mass murders.
Honestly Dave, I do not know how you twisted what I said about morality to mean you had none. My quote was "I like you, want to feel morally superior, but the truth is, NONE of us by our own efforts or merit are superior."
Also please note I gave two ideas that if done would end killings by gun. Dave, you are supporting a law you know would not do that, so I am surprised at your anger. Where are your two ideas that would end mass killings by guns?
"But just like the reasons for the bombing in Boston will be blamed on the GOP, the defeat of today's Bill is blamed 100% on the GOP.
It's because the libs need to keep that festering problem as an emblematic need for their control agenda. The ends justify the means, I suppose." Dave, that is not my quote.
James, thanks. I'm glad you noticed that my post did not insult anyone. Always good to read your thoughts.
Lucille Hayes, thanks for your concise, open minded evaluation of my position. Since YOU brought up the subject of abortion, would you like to talk about it?
I guess 'Guns don't kill people. People kill people' changed to 'The only thing that stops a bad man with a gun,
is a good man with a gun' because the NRA is confident enough in its own power now that doesn't even have to pretend it's for keeping guns out of bad people's hands anymore. And the filibuster of expanding background checks to the internet, gun shows, etc, shows they have ample reason to be confident. Halting (and rolling back) laws (when they aren't crippling the enforcement of existing ones) is doing gangbusters for them and their backers (gun, ammo and accessory manufacturers, not their members [something like 75% of whom, it should be noted, are for expanding background checks]), since there's only an expanding market in my earlier offhand comment of "Americans need guns, to protect themselves from Americans with guns".
Personally, I'm waiting for Intratec to stage a comeback, and, again, specifically market the Tec-9 to criminals ("New TEC-KOTE coating provides excellent resistant to fingerprints!"). Then we will need Tec-9s to protect ourselves from their Tec-9s. It's a model that can't help to make our streets safer. I, for one, already feel safer, and I will until they upgrade to AK47s (because then I'll need one, and since money is tight there will be that gap in between when I sell the Tec-9 and buy the AK. Maybe I'll curbside the Tec-9 to whoever wants it. Sucker).
Chuck Morre "Also please note I gave two ideas that if done would end killings by gun."
Your self-admittedly fantastical ideas of repealing the 2nd Amendment and seizing all guns or changing the very character of the citizenry, en masse, to the idealized "God fearing" type?
When expanding background checks (the kind of pared-down, compromised, loophole'd, edge-nibbling bill that's so enervating and by that I mean "so very Democrat") dies in the Senate you help out by coming up with absolutist, unrealistic solutions that won't happen. My plan is better. Ponies and kittens. That's all I've got so far.
And "the placement of the 10 Commandment in a government building or public school" is not "a violation of separation of church and state"* (with gray areas and exceptions) unless it's to the exclusion of everything else. Exclusive access to the Public Square is not Liberty, it's the opposite of that.
* Try teaching Comparative Religion or History without referencing it, for examples. Not to mention the several different Bible variants in the library.
Chuck, do you find it odd that you're being chastised for going off topic when you stayed completely ON TOPIC in your response?
Also, a post about how you sometimes go a bit off-topic to make a relevant point is, in fact, OFF TOPIC.
I love it.
Harley,
The fact that the Senate failed to represent we the people and most people want background checks is the topic.
Your troll will not admit, acknowledge or even debate that fact. He went so far as to misrepresent a poll that supports the topic.
He deliberately and dishonestly refused to discuss that highly relevant aspect of the post.
What do you call it when someone says "When you face the truth" and then proceeds to deny and deflect from the truth?
He's your boy, why won't you help him with the truth. Instead you declare he is "completely on topic".
Is their some secret Right Wing pact to never correct each other no matter how big the lie? "Liberals hate America", "Death panels", "Birth certificates", and Obama the "Marxist Muslim" are all such examples.
Whatever happened to "the truth will set you free"?
What we haven't heard is a coherent argument as to how the proposed legislation would prevent mass-murders.
If on-line and gun show background checks dissuade some criminals or unstable people from owning AR-15's then that is a good thing, right?
What's your problem with it. Before it became a political power game for LaPierre he is on record supporting background checks. But in typical Right Wing fashion, as soon as Democrats, or especially Obama, support a GOP idea, then we see the GOP/NRA disavow their stated positions.
When will we see a coherent argument for that behavior?
As for Harley's question. There is little we can do to prevent mass murder short of imposing a police state. But that is no excuse to not do what little we can is it?
In October 2012, a Wisconsin man who was prohibited from buying a gun because he was subject to a restraining order bought a gun from a private seller over the Internet without undergoing a background check. Two days later he used that firearm to kill his estranged wife and two other women. Four other people were wounded in the attack. The perpetrators of the 1999 Columbine High School massacre specifically sought out private sellers to obtain firearms so that their straw purchaser would not have to undergo a background check.
Private commercial sales of firearms without a background check have been linked to gun crime generally. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, gun shows are "a major venue for illegal trafficking" of firearms. The ATF specifically connected this assessment to private sales at gun shows, which have been taken advantage of by traffickers who supply weapons to Mexican drug cartels.
As an April 17 New York Times article notes, online "unregulated bazaars" where private gun transactions are completed are used by individuals who cannot pass a background check. According to 2011 investigationby New York City, online private sellers had a 62 percent "fail rate" in agreeing to sell a firearm to an undercover investigator who said that he or she could not pass a background check:
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that?
First of all, I don't call anybody my "boy" nor do I needlessly insult people. I agree whole-heartedly with James. Rationalize your behavior if you want. I'm not impressed.
The fact that 58% of people (I'll cede that point, though it's arguable) are for federal background checks doesn't negate the fact that the issue itself is not seen as a critical issue to the vast majority, as would be suggested by the 4% figure.
I can poll the population and ask their thoughts on the use of PED's in sports. Likely a strong majority opinion, but not likely to be an important issue to them.
#1 You cannot stop mass-murder with gun legislation short of draconian measures that few support. I don't believe federal background checks will help AT ALL - much less even a "little".
#2 In the grand scheme of things, mass murder is not a prolific problem that the average American has to worry about, but it makes for good TV so it gets overexposed. You are FAR more likely to be killed by a drunk driver. Kids perish from that every day. Do we conduct background checks for the purchase of alcohol? Is there a national outcry? Nope - becaue folks want their booze - regardless of the potential harmful effects.
This is receiving an inordinate amount of our energy as a national issue. When Tom say 90% of Americans want background checks "desperately", that is absolutely false. Or do you support that claim?
Harley,
Thank you for an answer. This proves you are more grounded in reality than your..ah counterpart.
Yet you cannot disagree with any wild claim he makes for some reason...Hence the "your boy" designation.
Mass murder is murder. And every murder is a problem. Of course the unemployed and under-employed have more immediate concerns, but a consensus is clear.
I don't believe federal background checks will help AT ALL - much less even a "little".
You're free to believe anything you like, but it is counter to evidence and history. I've shown evidence above where the absence of checks helped killers get their weapons.
In the meantime, terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals who will buy guns without a background check have the NRA, the Republican Party and the cowardly Democrats to thank.
When will we see a coherent argument for allowing that? By "coherent" that would mean apart from "beliefs".
To be honest Harley, I would find it more odd if those who chastise me were to all at once agree with me. If that were ever happen, my first reaction would be to question the position I took in my post.
The state that I live in requires a background check to buy a firearm. Since it has been a requirement murders by firearms has not declined. How have they citizens of my state benifited with that requirement is a question that has yet to be answered. What has happened is the records the state keeps on firearm purchases and owners of CCW have been sent to I believe the FBI. A violation of our state law.
The source of gun violence comes from the evil in the heart of the person who has the gun in their hand at the time they pull the trigger. It's a sad fact that there is no way to register the evil in human hearts at the time they buy a gun, a car or a bottle of booze. But it is there.
Which is why I gave the two ways to end gun violence. Both ways were rejected, no other solution was offered except the one that failed to past which even it's supporters said would not stop gun violence.
I guess for some it's all about feeling good that we did something in spite of how ineffective that something is in providing for its hoped for goal.
WASHINGTON (USA Today) — Four months after the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a USA TODAY Poll finds support for a new gun-control law ebbing as prospects for passage on Capitol Hill seem to fade.
Americans are more narrowly divided on the issue than in recent months, and backing for a bill has slipped below 50%, the poll finds. By 49%-45%, those surveyed favor Congress passing a new gun-control law. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in early April, 55% had backed a stricter gun law, which was down from 61% in February.
The survey of 1,002 adults was taken Thursday through Sunday by Princeton Survey Research. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points.
Those who support a bill want advocates in Congress to hang tough and not compromise — an attitude that also could complicate passing legislation. Sixty-one percent say members of Congress “should only agree to a stronger version of the bill, even if it might not pass.” Just 30% say they should “accept a weaker law” they know can win approval.
“So much of the support for gun control is emotional, following the Newtown tragedy,” says Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report. The December shooting at the Connecticut school left 20 children and six educators dead. “The longer you get away from there, people start thinking of other issues. They start thinking about terrorism or jobs or immigration, and not surprisingly, then some of the momentum behind gun control starts to fade.”
Post a Comment
<< Home