START A PETITION37,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
Group Discussions
Semi Automatic Firearms are Military Weapons - Lets Limit the Magazines ...
4 years ago


Semi-Automatic firearms are Military Weapons: Lets at least Limit the Magazines

Posted on 12/15/2012 by Juan


One of the two guns the Connecticut shooter used to murder 20 children and 6 adults was a Glock semi-automatic.  This datum is not surprising.  The Glock is among the more popular pistols sold in the United States.


The Glock semi-automatic was developed in 1982 for the Austrian army.  It was not envisioned that it would be bought by millions of citizens.  It is not in fact bought by millions of civilians anywhere but in the United States.  The gun should not be singled out for demonization; there are lots of semi-automatic pistols, and lots of semi-automatic rifles, and all of them are widespread and legal in the United States.


But it is worth underlining that Gaston Glock probably did not envision that you and your neighbors would just go into a shop and purchase his weapon.


This site tells the story:

“The Austrian military made an announcement in 1980 that it would be replacing the Walther P38 handgun – a WWII era weapon.  Their Ministry of Defense outlined the basic criteria for this new service pistol.  In 1982, Glock learned Austrian Army’s plan to procure a new weapon and begin assembling a team of European experts in the handgun field.  He chose a variety of people – including some from the military, some from the police force and he even chose civilians involved in sport shooting.”

It wasn’t long before Glock had his first working prototype.  Between Glock’s use of synthetic materials and the newer production technology, the design was very cost effective, making it a viable candidate.  The Glock 17 (so-named as it was the company’s 17th patent) passed every endurance and abuse test and was chosen over a number of pistol designs from well-known manufacturers to be the official replacement of the Walther P38.  Both military and police forces in Austria adopted the Glock 17 (aka:  P80 – Pistole 80) into service in 1982.   Many consider the Glock-17 one of the top pistols of all time.”


But here’s the kicker:


” Within its first 10 years, this pistol reached sales in excess of 350,000 in over 45 countries; the U.S. alone accounting for 250,000 of that total. “


So here is what happened:  in the first ten years, 100,000 of these guns were sold to militaries and police in Europe, and then the rest went to the civilians and police of the United States.  The US took 71% of all Glocks in their first decade, even though the US army rejected them.  The US is peculiar.


Can anything be done about the phenomenon of “mass shootings?” These killings have plagued the US for decades.


Gun advocates might argue that these mass shootings are relatively rare and exact a relatively low death toll in a country of 310 million people.  In 2012, there were 16 mass shootings in the US, which killed 88 persons and wounded hundreds.  We polish off 14,500 Americans a year with murders (around 9000 of them via firearms), and 30,000 a year in auto accidents.  There are also something like 18,000 suicides a year by firearm in the US, about half of the total;  perhaps large numbers of those people would still be alive if it hadn’t been so technically easy to take their on lives.  Anyway, mass shootings as a subset of lives taken by firearms are a tiny proportion.


One problem is that mass shootings produce a national trauma, and probably are designed to do so.  We were all, from President Obama on down, crying for the children yesterday.  Isolated murders of adults, however tragic, don’t upset us the way a madman shooting down children does.  Although they are few and the number of victims only account for 1% of those murdered by firearms every year, the mass shootings deeply disturb us.


It is also the case that mass shootings are arbitrarily defined as those in which 4 or more people are killed.  For those affected, three is pretty “mass.” 


Public policy is often made on the grounds of what we find unpalatable.  You will note that we are also upset by airplane crashes, and we insist that they are always completely unacceptable.  We don’t feel the same way about whacking 30,000 people a year (and injuring like 300,000) in auto collisions. 



This post was modified from its original form on 17 Dec, 13:57
4 years ago

The problem is getting worse.  10% of all mass shootings since 1982 have occurred in 2012, and 12 percent of the 543 victims since that date have been killed this year. 


In addition, however, some 2,000 of the 9,000 firearms murders a year are committed by drug gangs and other criminal gangs, and these are primarily using semi-automatic weapons to commit these murders. 


So there is a problem, of increased numbers of mass shootings and increased numbers of victims over time.  And there is a problem with the roughly 1 million gang members having military-style weapons and committing 14% of the murders every year in the US.

Is there a solution of the problem?


Even someone who really loves semi-automatic guns–  Paul Barret, author of”Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun,” admits of the 1994 ban on semi-automatic rifles:


“The one potentially sensible provision in the Assault Weapons Ban was the imposition of a ten-round magazine capacity, which affected both semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic pistols, including the Glock. You can begin to understand that at least this [limitation] might inhibit the mass shooter because, under that regime, he would at least have to think ahead enough to carry multiple ten-round magazines.”

Personally, I don’t understand why civilians need semi-automatic pistols and rifles at all.  And the evidence we have from the mass shootings this year is that yes, the shooter will bring extra rounds.  Lots of extra rounds.


But I’ll tell you what, some sort of limitation is better than none, and at least such legislation might establish the principle that guns can be regulated by law


So how about we propose a law specifying that no civilian may buy a semi-automatic weapon that has greater than a ten-round magazine, and that such weapons for the civilian market be constructed so that extra magazine drums cannot be attached?  And we ban semi-automatic rifles altogether.


What about all the semi-automatic weapons already in people’s possession?  There are like 280 million guns in the US, nearly one per person.  (Though in fact, a small minority owns most of these guns, and the proportion of gun owners in the population has been shinking; fewer and fewer people have more and more guns).  Since the 1980s, sales of semi-automatic weapons have been in the tens of thousands annually.


Well, you could have a buy-back program, and could offer people trade-ins.  Changing things would not have to be coercive.  People would have a choice between having an illegal pistol and a legal one with a smaller magazine. 


Contrary to what is often alleged, in any case, used guns are seldom the problem. Most used guns are in people’s safes.   The new ones are the problem.  Most people who commit mass shootings seem to go on a buying spree first, and gang members likewise most often like to purchase new weaponry.


So there you have it, a step toward a solution.  10-round magazines for the pistols, no semi-automatic rifles for civilians.

4 years ago

Nope.  This would be a first step with the end being disarming the people.  We have seen this in other countries.  It usually preceeds tyranny and mass murder by the governments involved.  There is a long history of this. 

But let's take another look at this.  Do people understand that most of these mass murder events happened as a result of gun restrictions?  For example the "gun free zones' around schools was a progressive innitative in the 1990's.  Essentially there were no school attacks until the State prohibited guns around schools.  Crazies want to murder people.  They seek a target rich environment where the is no resistance,  This nut case knew there would be no defense of the school or these children.  Look closely.  You will see a direct correlation to a low or no gun area and these attacks.   

4 years ago

people don't need automatic weapons with massive magazines, even hunters don't need this; it is called OVER KILL!


You tend to be extreme on many issues and use the constitution for way too many insane platforms like this one.  


Australia banned automatic weapons and their murder rate dropped significantly.  I am truely tired of far right extremists ranting and raving on this issue.


Semi automatic weapons in abundance are being hoarded by some, WHY?

4 years ago

Gun Control explained

A liberal tries to explain why she wants to make gun ownership illegal.
Watch more conversations with a liberal at

4 years ago

Wounded Knee Massacre

     The Wounded Knee Massacre occurred on the banks of Wounded Knee Creek about twenty five miles west of current day town of Martin, South Dakota on December 29, 1890  

     The events leading up to the Wounded Knee Massacre need to only be prefaced that tension was running high due to the murder of Sitting Bull on December 15 which caused some of the Miniconjou Sioux Indians and Hunkpapa Sioux Indians to leave the reservations and head toward the Badlands

     On December 28, the 7th U. S. Cavalry had arrested a village led by Big Foot of the Hunkpapa Sioux Indians.   The count arrested was 230 Sioux Indian women and children with only 120 Sioux Indian men.   Early in the morning on December 29th 1890, four Hotchkiss guns were aimed on the Wounded Knee Village.   500 Cavalry Troops under the command of Colonel James W. Forsyth began the process of disarming the Indians of  any guns, knives, axes and stakes which could be construed to be a weapon.  These were placed in a guarded pile

      No one knows what caused the disturbance, no one claims the first shot, the Wounded Knee Massacre began fiercely with the Hotchkiss guns raining fragmentation shells into the village at a combined rate of 200 or more rounds a minute.    The 500 well armed Cavalry Troopers were well positioned using crossing fire to methodically carry out what is know as the Wounded Knee Massacre

     Almost immediately most of the Sioux Indian men were killed.   A few Sioux Indians mustered enough strength barehanded to kill 29 soldiers and wound 39 more.    The bravery of these people was to no avail for as  long as an Indian moved, the guns kept firing.  Unarmed Sioux Indian Women and children were Mercilessly Massacred.  A few ran as far as three miles only to be chased by the long knives of the Cavalry and put to death

     Of the original 350 Indians one estimate stated that only 50 survived.   Almost all historical statistics report over 200 Indians being killed on that day but government figures only reported the Indian dead as 64 men, 44 women and girls, and 18 babies.   All of the bodies were buried in one communal grave

     If the Battle of the Little Big Horn had been the beginning of the end, Wounded Knee was the finale for the Sioux Indians.   This was the last major engagement in American history between the Plains Indians and the U. S. Army.  Gone was the Indian dream, pride and spirit

Progressive hero Abraham Lincoln and the Sioux
4 years ago

What brought about the hanging of 38 Sioux Indians in Minnesota December 26, 1862 was the failure "again" of the U.S. Government to honor it's treaties with Indian Nations. Indians were not given the money or food set forth to them for signing a treaty to turn over more than a million acres of their land and be forced to live on a reservation.

Indian agents keep the treaty money and food that was to go to the Indians, the food was sold to White settlers, food that was given to the Indians was spoiled and not fit for a dog to eat. Indian hunting parties went off the reservation land looking for food to feed their families, one hunting group took eggs from a White settlers land and the rest is history.

Information below tells how President Lincoln and Minnesota Governor Alexander Ramsey set out to exterminate Indians from their home land.

Authorities in Minnesota asked President Lincoln to order the immediate execution of all 303  Indian males found guilty. Lincoln was concerned with how this would play with the Europeans, whom he was afraid were about to enter the war on the side of the South. He offered the following compromise to the politicians of Minnesota: They would pare the list of those to be hung down to 39. In return, Lincoln promised to kill or remove every Indian from the state and provide Minnesota with 2 million dollars in federal funds. Remember, he only owed the Sioux 1.4 million for the land.

So, on December 26, 1862, the Great Emancipator ordered the largest mass execution in American History, where the guilt of those to be executed was entirely in doubt. Regardless of how Lincoln defenders seek to play this, it was nothing more than murder to obtain the land of the Santee Sioux and to appease his political cronies in Minnesota.

4 years ago

Everyone that differs with Sheila's views  is "insane".  Funny, people that have that kind of world view  are.....well, unstable........

  • "Megalomania is characterized by an inflated sense of self-esteem and overestimation by persons of their powers and beliefs'. Historically it was used as an old name for narcissistic personality disorder prior to the latter's first use by Heinz Kohut in 1968", 
  • Best wishes Sheila:   

4 years ago

Thanks for the hysterically funny:  "Gun control explained".

And the not funny but relevant historical :  "Wounded Knee Massacre"

Thanks Dr. Jim
4 years ago

Problem - Reaction - Solution

1) The government creates or exploits a problem blaming it on others
2) The people react by asking the government for help willing to give up their rights
3) The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis

Here we have it :

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein says she will introduce a bill next month to place a ban on assault weapons.
  • Dec. 16, 2012, 4:52 p.m. GMT from by feed
4 years ago

and a nice, a short one about free speech

Facebook Suspends Account For Questioning Official Narrative on Shooting

Police threatens prosicute for "unauthorized information"
4 years ago

4 years ago

I guess I am sounding a bit like good ole Christian and Chile .... where are they ????  Since Obama got re-elected, I don't see them around too much!

4 years ago

If that is all true about Lincoln and the indians then he is no better than what is around these days; they are all scum bags.



4 years ago

the democrats, they are far more personable and keep emails coming; this internet friendliness works, it breaks down barriers and personalizes these people far more. 


republicans are far too distant from the voters and appear cold, calculating and disinterested in the electorate as a whole. 


  I know now why people do NOT want republicans in power in the senate or as president. 


 GWB tried to privatize social security which would have been a disaster as the market is rigged.  more money for greedy people to steal and eliz. warren campaigned on this issue and said scott brown took funding from wall st. as did mitt romney.   of course obama did as well, but they turned more sour on obama this time around.


     that is the problem with the GOP, they want to take social security away from the people.  The gop was notorious for raiding soc.sec. funds as they started it and the democrats continued; but they have that stigma against them. 


   republicans will not gain national power but they will get state governorships as they do a far  better job on state levels.



The people want social security and medicare and don't trust Republicans at all.

4 years ago

This is America, Sheila (if you don't know what that means then you need a course in US Constitution 101). I don't get to tell you what you "need" and you don't get to tell me what I need. But I have a question... If you were going to defend yourself against a vicious dog, would you hope to win that fight with a toothpick? Have you SEEN the arsenals our overlords have to protect THEMselves?

4 years ago
Good point Katii. Progressives are quick to point out that in the 1700's there were only single shot slow reload muskets. Some of them say that is all we should have now. But it is plain to see the 2ed Amendment protects at least the equitant of a carried military grade weapon of the times. Not bows and arrows for examples. Or spears. Whatever the current technology could provide that could be carries. In today's time, that means a automatic weapon. Not semi automatic. The ban on automatic weapons is unconstitutional.
And yes.  Our overlords do have some pretty impressive arms, no?  Funny that they are so intent on disarming us while they are protected.  Very egalitarian of them. 
The elites and THEIR children: protected, yours? NOT ​
4 years ago
  • How many know that before the gun/weapons free zones around schools was initiated, there were no attacks leading to mass murder in schools? As I recall Obama was in favor of the school gun free zones when he as a legislator in Illinois. The results have been to attract nut cases who want to rack up a body count while minimizing the chances of getting shot before they kill a bunch of defenseless people.
  • Note also that in Colorado, Holmes sought out the single theater out of 7 in the area that had a policy of a weapons ban. Not the largest, not the closest. The one that had the lowest chances of resistance.
  • The largest mass killing was at Virginia Tech, where 32 died and 17 were seriously wounded. Virginia Tech is one of few areas in Virginia that is a gun free zone. In fact, every single incident was in a weapons free zone and/or a gun free zone. Not just in the USA.
  • In Europe mass killings have been about the same in number as the USA, despite the fact that many of those countries have very strict gun control/bans. Every one of those have been in gun/weapons free zoned.
  • The crazies will always be around. The question is why has the government denied the means of protecting the children that the government has charge of? Why are the kids, the teachers, the administrators banned from protecting those that cannot protect themselves?
  • This is smoke and mirrors folks. The government has come up with yet another failure. But face reality: advertizing that a school or public area cannot resist is a magnet to someone that has murder as an objective. Those that came up this idea, like the political elites in DC have armed protection for THEIR children. THEY are important, your children? ...Not so much.
  • Once again, the ideological agenda of the political elites is paramount. They will not admit they have made a horrible mistake, and like all the other crisis of the recent past, they are using this incident to advance their own power.

This post was modified from its original form on 19 Dec, 7:36
For Sheila
4 years ago

   Unlike others, I am a paragon of patience.  Easygoing to a fault in fact! 

  • Yeah.  In the struggle, I have "occasionally"  Mislaid my gentler side. 
The 1994 (previous) assault weapons ban revealed
4 years ago

4 years ago

"Police threatens prosicute for "unauthorized information" -Jim Oh yeah? Then they better start with the media, who reported a handful of "misleading information" in the aftermath. Like reporting it was Ryan not his brother who was the shooter, like Peter the father was also murdered, and like the mother worked at the school. All not true and very misleading.

4 years ago
  • Haven't your heard Katii? The First Amendment only applies to the mainstream media now. You know:........ the official mouthpiece of the elites. Both of "the sides" of course. We must be given the correct versions of the two sides, now mustn't we? That makes it even handed! Fair. and balanced!....... Then,....... oh boy! We get to choose which "side" to follow. Very generous of them to provide pre conceptualized "sides". 


!!!   But if you are really "with it", and "independent", you can even pick and choose what parts of "the sides" you will believe! This is called being "open minded" and "reasonable" and "bi-partisan". Then you are truly evolved! ....  Just super!

If one does not accept either of what "the sides" represent, , (Unthinkable) must be crazy. Fringe. Even dangerous. A real sociopath. 

This post was modified from its original form on 19 Dec, 8:34
4 years ago

Oh God. I hope I'm on the right "side." I mean, how awful would it be if I chose a different side than all my like-minded friends. It could get lonely. And what if it turned out their "side" royally screwed things up (example: GWB's "side," then Obama's "side"). Can we say uncomfortable, defensive, divisional, and digging heels in even further - and Americans struggling with one "side" (a third side) trying to get across the truth and the other sides refusing to hear it never mind listen and think about it. How do you think one escapes group think, or in this case "side think," if they don't start LISTENING to other 'sides', then in listening we are compelled to verify thru study (in non-state sponsored/published material, which includes mainstream media), then you encounter along the way people like David D. and Jim S. who haven forgotten more political history than you know, and you learn more, your views change when you are exposed to the realities the state keeps from us, things that harm us, endangers us. Then you are never the same again. You correctly view government itself for the great predator in waiting that it is, waiting ever so patiently for well financed plans to run their course until it's time to strike and take another chunk of America's heart - and always with the two most powerful "sides" consent.

Yes, The Weapons Kill The Children
4 years ago

Never the reporting on a rampage was as extensive as that which takes place because of the shooting at the school in Newtown. For days, the newspapers and TV stations roll over with reports and always is the message that is conveyed only, to prohibit firearms...

to read my article, click the following link

4 years ago

If the tears Obama and Clinton shed for the victims of Sandy Hook were multiplied by the little dead bodies their policies and actions have caused they would drown in a river. If the collective screams and shouts of despair of their loved ones of those doomed to die under sanctions, bullets and bombs their collective cries would shatter the eardrums of entire cities. There is no Pax based on the worship of the State. This will not end until we humans reject the lies and end the cycles of hatred and violence.

4 years ago

Katii and JIm ... I don't mind guns, I know the progressives are using this horrific tragedy to bandstand gun control.


I don't think everyone should be getting those high powered automatic weapons with massive magazines.  I heard O'Reilly say same thing as I did and he thinks maybe FBI should monitor who gets those guns.  


This mother had a very disturbed child who used her guns to do the unthinkable, kill innocents in mass murder spree.  I know there is far more to this tragedy and more will come out but it is a horrific event which some will use to push their agenda.


My young uncle of 13 y.o. died from a bullet to the head ... by his best buddie... they were playing with my father's guns and it was a horrible accident which scarred my dad for life.

However, he went into the Army, shot the Germans but would not hunt again. 

He never shot animals again nor would he have a gun in the house.

My brother is an expert marksman trained in the Marine Corps.  He does not have a gun because he has a volatile temper.  He knows better.  He has a brown belt in Karate, Judo, etc.  never got black belt because that is considered a weapon.  He trained in Taiwan.

Not everyone knows their emotional limits and that is the problem with gun ownership today.   If I had a gun, I might use on some as I have my limits as well.  

4 years ago

Sheila.... please watch earlier post/video: 

"The 1994 (previous) assault weapons ban revealed"
It explains why it will not work. 

And even for a media person O'Rielly is pretty dumb.   Poorly informed too.
4 years ago

If you think you'd be quick to take someone's life - murder them - merely because you had a gun when the pissed you off then you would not among the "responsible gun owner" segment, and should probably remove all sharp objects from your home too, don't invite guests over to swim in your pool, etc.

This post was modified from its original form on 19 Dec, 16:33
Innocents Betrayed - The True story of Gun Control Worldwide
4 years ago

First sorry for your uncle who had to die by an awful accident like this Sheila.

In this powerful documentary produced by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (, you will learn how governments have historically deprived people of firearms ... and then wiped them from the face of the earth.

This is the true story of Gun control from around the world, especially in the 20th century. It details how governments have ALWAYS BEEN the biggest threat to the safety, security and prosperity of the people. While Americans can see how this could happen in other countries, most can't EVER imaging it being able to happen here because there are so many rights guaranteed by the constitution. But that ONLY when the people STAND UP for those rights, because it's the nature of government to constantly try and TAKE them away from us.

The producers of this film encourage copies of this film to be distributed as far and wide as possible, with the understanding that this permission is granted ONLY for non-commercial use. You can buy a DVD copy of this and other films at and

Our forefathers, weary of the oppressive measures that King George III's government forced upon them, in common declared their independence from England in 1776. They were not expected to be successful in that resistance. The moneyed people had backed England for two major reasons. First, our forefathers wanted a rigid, written Constitution "set in concrete."

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms," wrote Thomas Jefferson.

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms," argued James Madison.

As Thomas Jefferson said "Experience has shown that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted into tyranny".

4 years ago

In Mexico, only gangs and the government own guns, look at the result to the Average citizen. More and more now refuse to be disarmed victims.

Meanwhile, in racist-moron Teabagger land ...
4 years ago

Asheville Tea Party Gun Raffle Features Assault Weapon Similar To One Used In Newtown Shooting
Posted: 12/20/2012 2:09 pm EST | Updated: 12/20/2012 2:21 pm EST

The Asheville, N.C. chapter of the Tea Party is holding a gun raffle fundraiser. One of the guns featured is an assault weapon similar to the one used in last week's deadly shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

According to WNCN, the Tea Party group posted the raffle, which it calls "The Great Gun Giveaway" to its website Monday, mere days after the tragic event, which has sparked fervent national debate about gun control.

A DPMS Panther Oracle AR-15 assault weapon and a Keltec PMR-30 .22 Magnum pistol are included in the raffle. Police say Newtown gunman Adam Lanza opened fire on grade-school students, staff and teachers with a Bushmaster .223 AR-15 military-style assault weapon, a civilian version of the U.S. military's M-16, that was legally owned and registered to his mother.

According to USA Today, gun raffles aren't uncommon, although one local firearms instructor observed that the timing of the Tea Party fundraiser was inappropriate.

A spokesman for the Asheville Tea Party told NBC News that the raffle was planned before the shootings occurred.

"It goes without saying that any innocent souls killed or injured by whatever means have our sincere sympathy," Fremont V. Brown III, vice-chairman of the Asheville Tea Party, said.

The gun raffle remained on the Asheville Tea Party's website Thursday morning. It states that winners must be North Carolina residents and be able to pass background checks to claim the guns.

The local chapter also made news in September when it hosted a "Machine Gun Social" fundraiser at a firing range.

At that event, which benefitted candidates endorsed by the Asheville Tea PAC and iCaucus, a national Tea Party group, attendees paid money to shoot off submachine guns, AK-47's and M-16 assault weapons. The raffle differs in that the winners will actually take the guns home.

Some AR-15 models were outlawed under the assault weapons ban of 1994. That ban expired in 2004.

Congress is expected to vote on gun control legislation when it reconvenes in January.

4 years ago

What a stupid bunch of losers. Teabaggers are a blight on this planet.

4 years ago

Talk about blights and losers... Antigun nuts are an attempted death sentance for law abiding citizens. We can largely blame those who fought for and got "GUN FREE ZONES" for the lost lives at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where an insane person who had just murdered his own mother while she slept (no resistance) marched right in - unchallenged - met with ZERO defense - and murdered six unarmed guardians and the the children they were responsible to PROTECT - but COULDN'T because of people like you, Christian. My God, How do you sleep at night?

Connecticut school shooter killer link to LIBOR SCANDAL?
4 years ago

The father of Newtown Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza who is a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial. The father of Aurora Colorado movie theater sho
oter James Holmes is Robert Holmes, the lead scientist for the credit score company FICO. Both men were to testify before the US Sentate in the ongoing LIBOR scandal. The London Interbank Offered Rate, known as Libor, is the average interest rate at which banks can borrow from each other. 16 international banks have been implicated in this ongoing scandal, accused of rigging contracts worth trillions of dollars.

The above story has been thoroughly checked as accurate. Feel free to check this posting yourself links are provided below. If you have anything to add to this story pleas post it in comments. I have added links to verify this story’s accuracy even further. Please look at the bottom of this post.
~ Tom R.

Sources & Resources

Libor scandal grows as the fathers of two mass murderers were to testify

2 Mass Shootings from colorado and connecticut Connected To the Libor Scandal?

Was Newton a False Flag? Videos: 2 Mass Shootings now Connected To Libor Scandal!


New details in the Newtown gunman investigation

2 Mass Shootings Connected To Libor Scandal?

Libor - what is it and why does it matter?

4 years ago

Fantasizing about shooting it out with "the guvermint" is ridiculous in the extreme. When they park an Abrahms tank and a couple APCs at either end of your street and they have 4 Apache helicopters, an AWACS and a couple drones circling overhead, and they tell you to come out with yer hands up, you had best comply. Your assault rifle is not going to help you. Save fighting with the guvermint for the ballot box and peaceful demonstrations. Guns in your home are far more likely to kill you or a member of your own family than anyone else. Ask Nancy Lanza.....

4 years ago

Archie, please don't disturb the good people trying to pound square pegs into a round holes. They work very hard.

4 years ago

more Libor conspiracy!   Oh No!    that is more Internet whackery propoganda ... it is out that to catch the moonbats!


Those teabaggers in Asheville are morons.  keep it up, the tea party has an awful name as it goes, just add more insanity to their group and lock them up in the lunatic bin.

4 years ago

Um, since when did demanding the "right" to defend oneself become an excercise in pounding a square peg into a round hole?

When are you anti-gun people going to address the very real issue of people being able to defend themselves against preditors? Or in your fantasy world, NOT being able to defend themselves against preditors? 

Archie, then it begs the question (or should) why the gvmt. has a monopoly on WMD, big and small if it renders it's 'subjects' defenseless against them.  And, how's that ballot box working out for ya?  Is your dollar worth 100 cents again yet? No? It's only worth five cents? hmm... not working out so good. Knowing full well that crazy people and criminals don't obey your "gun laws," how'd the ballot box work out for the kids at Sandy Hook? They're dead now.  Happy?  

4 years ago

Well okay, see how your guns do against attack helicopters, tanks, rockets, etc. Not that i think it will ever come down to that (or that the ptb need to use such crude methods), but it would at least move the issue forward to put to rest the notion about fighting off a tyrannical government.

4 years ago

That's pretty much the point, Bryan.  There is no way for the citzenry to defend ITself against the people (your government) with ALL the weaponry that can be used to control, threaten or kill millions of people as it's been done COUNTLESS times troughOUT history and has cost more than 100 MILLION lives of "unarmed citizenry."  At the VERY least we should be allowed to go down shooting (defending)! We just might hit one and take out at least one government zombie should it ever come to that.  And it will after EVERYONE has been disarmed, which is what I presume you are advocating. Do you remember Mao? Pol Pot? Hitler? Amin? Any of those names ring a bell? 

PLEASE stop wishing that on Americans! 

4 years ago

So it just comes down to being able to take out a few of the military forces if it ever came down to it (and again, the ptb don't even need to resort to this). And so, if the government only stands to lose some soldiers, why are they bothering to wait until everyone is disarmed before they go on this killing spree?

None of it make much sense, Katii, but it's not as crazy as saying anyone wishes a massacre of the US citizens because they point out that personal firearms are useless against military forces. I mean c'mon.

4 years ago

here we go again, putting the drug conspiracy out there.... priceless from the same people who want drugs legalized.


I am not buying into the conspiracy crap about Newtown ... facts are not out there.

That adam was not on drugs; he had psychiatric issues and he had a mom in denial who many are saying was a preper.  Preparing for the end days and buying ammo, guns, etc.  Who know, I don't believe the conspiracy talk at all. 

All Hail to the Glorious State
4 years ago
  • Archie: "When they park an Abrahms tank and a couple APCs at either end of your street and they have 4 Apache helicopters, an AWACS and a couple drones circling overhead,"

  • And Bryan: "see how your guns do against attack helicopters, tanks, rockets,"

  • Interesting that you progressives don't even begin to wonder why the police have become militarized. As you say, the police have all those weapons...... And now spy and military drones in our skies. I assume that you know that the actual military is legally banned from using force within the borders of the USA? Probably not. And doubtless you would have no problem with the government violating this restriction. 

  • So...... we are essentially becoming a occupied nation...... A totalitarian State...... But it's OK, because, according to you, "we are the government". If those weapons are used on the American people "we" are in favor of that.

  • Pay no attention to the people behind the curtain. You know..... For example, the people that using fraud ripped off the American people.... the people that pull your strings, pretend to be one of you.

  • ......No, your glorious State didn't prosecute any of the crooks. Gee, I guess that means you think that "we" didn't want any of the crooks to go to jail......... Or, perhaps they are the government and not us? Could it be that all those weapons that you so obviously applaud are for the protection of the State and the people that really run it?  Not "we"?

  • What I increasingly hear from people like you is that you would condone the use of violence against your fellow citizens. Overwhelming force.  Essentially murder. 

  • I must say I am not surprised Byran and Archie. Many of your historical (and present) hero's are mass murderers and war criminals. That is the end point of your political ideology. The result of the willingness to use force against those that disagree. Using the rationalizations of the State, you have and probably will again condone murder. We have seen this throughout history. It ends badly for all.

This post was modified from its original form on 23 Dec, 9:52
4 years ago

Because, Bryan, even the government zombies aren't suicidal, and the gov knows it. How many of Hitlers zombies would have been willing to go round up ARMED Jews? It looks like you are refusing to acknowledge history, and have some utopian idea that your government would never turn on the people, but if it did it would just rain hellfire all over 50 states ... while right now you are living at an era called the beginning of the end, when Americans starting losing the last of their nature rights - unless Liberty wins. Either way you will be remembered as one who willingly gave up their rights. And no, it's notcabout "taking out military personnel" - its about my NATURAL RIGHT to be able to defend myself against WHAT/WHOM ever. Come on...

4 years ago

What would have happened in 1776 if Bryan's  "resistance is futile"  was accepted by the people of the colonies? 

4 years ago

And doubtless you would have no problem with the government violating this restriction. 

  • So...... we are essentially becoming a occupied nation...... A totalitarian State...... But it's OK, because, according to you, "we are the government". If those weapons are used on the American people "we" are in favor of that.

Just wow. All disagreement on issues aside, you really are a loon, Jim.

We will never change this system, or truly protect ourselves, with guns (and no one is saying someone shouldn't own a handgun to protect themselves from criminals). No one has come up with a coherent answer how guns could protect us from today's military (unlike in 1776). But i don't expect any coherence here.

4 years ago
  • Gee Bryan Why would we need to "protect us from today's military" if the State had not been authorized to use force against the people?. That is a direct result of those that empower the State to impose their will on others. That's not me, but you want that centralized government and a powerful State don't you Bryan? When and if that State or the people are threatened it will respond with violence.
  • Of course, you will say that there are things that you don't want the State to do. You are somehow under the delusion that a powerful State will not be controlled by the powerful. At the expense of the general population.
  • You are unable to do anything other than to repeat the same rhetoric over and over again........ Yes, I've been on the progressive sites and they are saying the same exact things you are. Over and over. Ad nausem. You seem to be unable to respond with anything that you haven't read, so you resort to calling others names when you are unable to respond to other comments.

Here comes Jim....
4 years ago

Hey Jim, putting words in other people's mouths and then arguing with your own words is not only rude, but it's super dumb. You're wasting your own time and everyone else's too.

4 years ago

Archie, it's yourself who is "wasting your time" defending the state, if that's what you are doing. Or are you just here to sling insults cuz youve got nothing else?

4 years ago

Bryan, Archie, what's your solution to Sandy Hook. How would you have avoided that from ever happening? Waiting....

Archie and the name callers.
4 years ago
  • Here we go with name calling again. Notice that isn't coming from me. "rude", "super dumb", "loon". have no answers either huh Archie? But if you  or Bryan or anyone else has a claim and problem with me, "putting words in other people's mouth"....... step up to the plate and show me where I am wrong rather that resort to name calling........ Notice I used quotes, not claims. 
  • As far as "wasting your time and everyone else's" Archie? Not a coincidence that you and the other big government apologists show up at the same time is it?
  • Fact is, you have a problem with people resisting. IMO, it makes you angry. I, and others here are do not advocate imposing an ideology through government force. You do. 
  • When your rationalizations for using government force to achieve what you want is .shown to be self serving , Trojan horses for the powerful, and abject failures? You have no moral, ethical, or economic responses that are not easily dismissed. You cannot debate the issues involved, so you resort to using logical fallacies, innuendo and character assassination.

4 years ago

You beat me to some of that Katii.  Fact is that the big government bunch cannot explain why when the  government has taken a higher percentage of the GDP, things for the general population get worse. 

4 years ago

And do try to think you ideas thru to their "logical" conclusions while considering all factors, like enforcement, the financial cost of enforcement (& prosection, incarceration, parole officers, and on and on), getting all weapons from all criminals, being able to protect oneself against a mortal threat (by whomever), etc.

4 years ago

And do keep in mind also the fact that where there is the strictest "gun control" (for law abiding citizens only of course, like at schools full of children and unarmed guardians) there is the least crime. OK, go...

4 years ago

Jim asked of progressives earlier... WHY are our local police becoming militarized? Why do you, Bryan, Archie, et al, think our local police now use military gear and use military equipment, like tanks and drones?

4 years ago

Terrorism happened in a big way!

4 years ago
  • Sheila, 9/11 was a outlier. A another abject failure of the government despite having $10's of billions to prevent such. Consider that no one in government was fired after 9/11. Why? .

  • Exclude 9/11 and look at before and after the event. The total number of Americans that have lost their lives in terrorists events over the last 2 decades is about 300. Around the same as occurs in one US city in a year.

  • Does this justify the $100's of billions spent. The repression of our constitution? Massive interventions overseas and the deaths of 100's of thousands that had nothing to do with terrorism? Over $3 Trillion in costs overseas? Do you really believe that?

  • Do the police need APC's, tanks, RPG's, missile launching drones, surveillance drones, helicopter gunships? For 38 terrorist attacks over the last two decades?

  • Does the government need to spy on millions of Americans?

  • The government has spend $3.1 Billion dollars for every terrorist caught. And the vast majority of those have been set up by the FBI/homeland security and would have posed no threat if they had not been encouraged and financed by government agents in order to justify their jobs.  .

  • Who is the real enemy? 

This post was modified from its original form on 24 Dec, 7:58
4 years ago

SL, tell us exactly how a militarized local police force is going to PREVENT a "terrorist attack" when the ENTIRE US MILITARY with the total resources of the FBI, NSA, and CIA ! couldnt prevent it? what are the tanks and drones for? Clean up?

4 years ago

"19 hrs ago What would have happened in 1776 if Bryan's  "resistance is futile"  was accepted by the people of the colonies?" -Jim He wouldn't be here to do everything in his power to give back to the 'crown' what the colonists gave their blood, sweat, tears, and lives for. That's what would have happened.

4 years ago

every modern police force today around the world is predominately more military style trained.

SWAT has been around for sometime and we need it.

In London, there are cameras everywhere and facial recognition technology is in place.  We are actually behind them.  NYC is catching up.


People are extremely violent today.

What terrorists?
4 years ago

  The resources the combined law enforcement agencies of the US government have uncovered a  dozen or so terrorists since 9/11.  Most of them were set up.  This hardly the massive threat that some claim.  Over the last 5 years, some 40,000 died in the drug wars.  That's a real threat.  

4 years ago

Oh I see, because OTHER countries with centralized government are arming to the teeth as if the next door state was going to invade any minute now, because THEY are stupid enough to let their own dictator governments (that PRODUCE those "terrorists") disarm and spy on their every move and word - literally - you think that makes us "behind," SL? No, that makes us still in the lead. But if you have your way we'll all be chipped in the future. Gee thanks.

people are extremely violent today?
4 years ago

Figures are per 100,000

Despite the claims that we Americans are more violent than in the past....  we are not. 

So again, why do the police have all the military weapons Sheila?   Who is the enemy? 

This post was modified from its original form on 24 Dec, 9:54
4 years ago

Note the above 40,000 death number due to the drug wars is in Mexico, which has, by the way, the most strigent gun laws in the Americas. 

4 years ago

Ah, so now after accusing others of being in favor of the government killing people and saying that their heros are mass murderers, all based on complete fabrication, we're going to start complaining about being called names.

Jeez, it just gets better and better...

4 years ago

The United States Government is the greatest instigator of violence in the world. There is no way I'd support them with all the latest weaponry... I think the Black Panthers and American Indian Movement would agree. I'd say that local police departments and the military should be required to give up their weapons before any citizens.

The second amendment is what protects the other amendments

4 years ago

Seems like too many people prefer the easy solution in turning matters over to the government instead of the harder work of dealing with the culture at large.

4 years ago

Who are these people asking for more of Police State, 'London - blueprint',

less of Constitution and

calling honest and independent investigation and research 'complete fabrication' and 'fantasizing' ?

4 years ago
  • I said:  "Many of your historical (and present) hero's are mass murderers and war criminals."
  • Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, both Clintons, Bush, Obama and others were/are  mass murderers and/or war criminals.
  • As I said;   "Of course, you will say that there are things that you don't want the State to do."  

You seek to empower the State and it's use of force.  Then you seek to absolve yourselves from responsibility for empowering that State and the violence that results.  .  

4 years ago

Two firefighters dead after four of them are hit when shooter guns down crews responding to Webster, N.Y., Christmas Eve house blaze
New York firefighters were called to the upstate New York blaze on Lake Road about 5:30 a.m. Authorities said there could be one or more shooters Monday morning.

A gunman shot four firefighters and killed two of them at the scene of a house fire in the upstate New York town of Webster on Monday morning, officials said.

Details were still emerging as the Monroe County Sherrif's Office said there could be more than one shooter involved in the attack near Rochester. Authorities didn't say whether they had apprehended any suspects, but were combing the area.

Fire crews were called to the scene on Lake Road just after 5:30 a.m. The shooting, however, forced officials to halt fighting the blaze, which spread to two other neighboring homes, Sheriff Patrick O’Flynn said.

At least one firefighter was listed in satisfactory condition at Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester, Webster Fire Marshal Rob Boutillier told the Democrat and Chronicle.

The extent of injuries to the other firefighter wasn't immediately known. Investigators also didn't say exactly how two of the firefighters died.

Read more:

4 years ago

Toddler dies after accidently shooting self

HARRISON, Tenn. (AP) - A Tennessee toddler is dead after accidently shooting himself.

Janice Atkinson, with the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office, told WRCB-TV ( ) that 2-year-old Brennan Nowell died late Thursday from his injuries.

Authorities have said the child was shot in the stomach with a firearm that belonged to his grandfather.

Neighbors told the station that the child found the handgun and was playing with it when he accidentally shot himself.

Atkinson says an investigation into the shooting continues.

Information from: WRCB-TV,

4 years ago

Ok..let's eliminate every risk imaginable..ooops! We've banned or eliminated human life

4 years ago

Parsifal, the obvious complete fabrication was in saying that anyone said anything that implied being okay with, or actually in favor of, the government using violence against citizens. Or as you're now saying "asking for more of a police state". Nothing but deflection and putting words in people's mouths here. Swear to god i've never seen more dishonest "discussion" on the net than by some of the members here.

David, of course we can't eliminate every risk, but that doesn't necessarily speak to the issue of changing gun or ammo laws. We of course have many laws in society to minimize risk -- against various types of assault, robbery, etc, etc. There will always be people against some of these laws (as i am), but no sane person accuses the people who are for certain laws of wanting a totalitarian police state.

I agree with you that it's more a matter of changing culture to really change things. But as to your statement about the 2nd, again, our guns wouldn't protect us from a totalitarian state that would use force to take all our rights if it ever came down to that.

Hey Christian, stop calling for us all to be killed by the government, mk!

4 years ago

Bryan, you just are not grasping the point. Step out of you party/media decorated box and take a different tac on the issue. Leave Utopia and account for reality. And if this is the thread I asked a question of you (yeah, 10 hours ago frm now) please answer it?

4 years ago

I also think those that want to limit guns are also willing to give up certain urban areas to the Crips and Bloods as well as some Southwestern border towns to Mexican drug cartels. Do you think they care what the laws are? Government isn't doing a very good job of protecting citizens from them now..

4 years ago

Well, I guess it's time for me to wish everyone here a Merry Christmas. You're all good people and I'll enjoy arguing with you again on another day. I like to buy myself a Christmas present when I'm supposed to be shopping for other people, and I got myself the cd version of Exile on Mainstreet. Right now I'm on my fourth listen, and I think it's the greatest rock and roll album ever made. But I won't shoot you if you disagree with me....



4 years ago

Archie..I love ya man. I know while we don't agree on this issue, I know you are a man of peace. Exile on Mainstreet?? By the way,I've never owned a gun in my life and have moved away from places when I felt the SANE thing to do was to carry a weapon.

Merry Christmas

4 years ago
  • What I find interesting is that some here want to eliminate guns because they view guns as the means of committing violence. But by far the perpetrator of violence is the State and they wish to empower that State.
  • We have millions of people in prison that have not harmed another person or their property. That is a violent act.
  • We have a State that has and is attacking people and killing them by the thousands throughout the world. Those people that have not harmed anyone in this country and offer no threat to do so. That is a violent act.
  • We have a State that has and is causing the deaths of thousands by economic sanctions. That is a violent act.
  •  IMO, the State is a means of committing violence against others. You want to control guns, and you think that will solve the problems of violence?

I want to control the source of violence that is exponentially greater than what any civilian use of guns has caused. 

4 years ago

"There will always be people against some of these laws (as i am), but no sane person accuses the people who are for certain laws of wanting a totalitarian police state." -Bryan . Perhaps not consciously, but that will - eventually - be the end result of your work because it IS the goal of the elite who control the state - and the media that primes the peasants with their propaganda (in this case the most successful kind: be very afraid) to disarm the peasants by getting them to willingly give up their arms. Why do you think that is? To protect 'you' ? No. Notice they dont want to disarm themselves or their bodyguards, just you. . Like that saying goes, be careful what you wish for.

Again, as David said...
4 years ago

" 10:44 AM The United States Government is the greatest instigator of violence in the world. There is no way I'd support them with all the latest weaponry... I think the Black Panthers and American Indian Movement would agree. I'd say that local police departments and the military should be required to give up their weapons before any citizens. The second amendment is what protects the other amendments"

4 years ago

Well okay Katii, i'm always willing to answer a question as best i can. I'm sorry though you'll have to repeat it just so i'm sure of the exact question.

Interesting though that you'd bring that up, as i've never gotten any answers to any questions here other than the same wild blanket accusation of being in favor of a powerful police state. And nothing i've said has anything to do with a utopian vision or any party. You keep saying over and over that the state wants to do something as soon as everyone is disarmed -- as if they couldn't do the exact same thing now.

And no, what i'm saying doesn't lead to a totalitarian police state. Stricter or more lax gun laws is not one of the significant things that would lead to a totalitarian police state. It's just  nonsense to think those laws would. Yes, it would be good to control the state and we need a helluva lot of resistance, but our guns are the last thing that will do it. In reality, would just make things worse.

You're right Archie, Exile F'n rocks!

Cleveland Police Fired 137 Rounds Killing 2
4 years ago

A Cleveland officer thought a car fired a bullet at their police headquarters, police responded by engaging in a massive police chase which eventually ended with 13 police shooting 137 shots at the suspected "shooter's" car, riddling it with bullets and killing the male driver and female passenger, they even hit their fellow officers' cars with friendly fire.

After searching the vehicle police found no weapons. Additionally, no evidence was found a bullet was shot outside the police's headquarters.

no 'totalitarian Police State' Bryan ?

4 years ago

Bryan, why do you  think our local police now use military gear and use military equipment, like tanks and drones?

4 years ago

DRONES! Coming to a sky near you soon !!! Tens of THOUSANDS OF THEM!!! READ ALL ABOUT IT! ---------->

Really????.... REALLY?
4 years ago
  1. Bryan:  "i've never gotten any answers to any questions here other than the same wild blanket accusation of being in favor of a powerful police state. 
  2. "And:  "And no, what i'm saying doesn't lead to a totalitarian police state."
2 days ago

Figures are per 100,000

  • So, even though homicide rates have been declining in a INVERSE relationship to gun ownership and the capability of those guns. We somehow need to restrict those rights.
  • And how exactly would the government do that? By the police? By monitoring the public? Including going into their homes to search for them? By putting people in prison who disobeyed? By killing those that resist?
  • And how would this all be done? By increasing the capability of the police? By bringing in the military as Bryan as suggested might happen to those that resist?
  • How would it be paid for? By increasing taxes on those that disagree? Using government force and coercion if they resist? Having neighbors spy and inform on each other, perhaps?
  • The capability and expense of law enforcement has risen dramatically over the last two decades. Notice that of the people here, only the ones that are expressing concern over the militarization of the police are the same that are expressing a concern on the elimination or restrictions on fire arms? The same people seem to be concerned over the Patriot Act, the NDAA, Obama's Star Chamber and execution list?
  • Are we to believe that the advocates of powerful government would somehow support our rights and liberty against that poweful government that they want so much? ....Truth is I see little chance of that happening.
  • Notice that the people advocating for this restriction are in favor of a more powerful and intrusive government in general? That they have no problem using that powerful government to advance their political, economic and social agenda?  Forcing others to pay for it?........ Imposing their ideology on others by .....force? 

4 years ago

Katii, i don't think most local police forces are using tanks and drones, but i won't argue the overall point about the police becoming more militarized. But anyway, that doesn't mean that citizens owning more guns or less guns is the thing that's going to change that. Really, my only point here was that our guns won't protect us from the worst case scenario -- and from that all these wild extrapolations about supporting a police state.

And let's note that people aren't allowed to legally own machine guns now, but like other laws (for better or worse) it doesn't take a totalitarian police state to enforce that.

In the wounded knee stand-off of '72 the local national gaurd or maybe police wanted to use military force against the resistors. A real military colonel told these limp dicks to basically fuk off. I think real military guys know at least a little about life and death and what they're supposed to stand for, but i wouldn't trust finding much of that (at least that had influence) today.

This post was modified from its original form on 26 Dec, 18:31
4 years ago

Wait, is someone actually denying that there's a police state coming to your town if not already???

4 years ago

Drones are already here in America.

4 years ago

Okay, ...way too tired to read the whole thread right now,...but jeez,

"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." ~Thomas Jefferson

It's still a no brainer. I don't care how you equate it or rationalize it to what it means today.

It's still a statement of eternal truth.

4 years ago

Bryan, it's not 1972 anymore!  I don't know how old you are but I was married with a baby in 1972, and believe me, this is a very different country today, and I'm talking about the stripping of ALL of your constitutional protections against the state over the past twelve years.

In 1971 my baby didn't have to be "numbered."  By the time my second son was born it was imposed BY THE STATE that ALL newborns be "papered."  35 years later habeas corpus and posse comistatus?  Gone."Free speech zones" ? you got 'em.  Warrantless spying, search and seizure? All day every day. Shall I go on? 

4 years ago

I wish Gun nuts would fight as hard to eliminate the military as they would to own weapons. But unsurprisingly, most only focus on one part of the 2nd ammendment.

Yes we have a continual esclation in the militarization of the police and no I don't want the populice completely unarmed. However, I find the "slippery slope" argument completely inane. If the population was really going to "win" a war with the US military, it would be via the numbers of people fighting back, and the insurrection from within the military itself, not the limitation of certain kinds of guns that are more capable of producing mass slaughter in a few minutes.

The idea that we can't safely institute laws that limit weapons is insane. 


4 years ago

Chile, Supporting our constitutional rights  does not equal "gun nut."  I don't like guns. I abhors violence, but what's that got to do with protecting yourself from whomEVER is threatening your life.

And excuse me, but why the hell  do you think supporting Ron Paul was about? My God, you really are out of the loop. Mainstream media and government will do that to ya. Man up and unplug already.

4 years ago

Chile, what is truly INSANE is to say citizens shouldn't be able to defend against a rogue state (be it federal or local) like ours with more than a single shot rifle or gun. You, Chile, are a lemming, a product of the great propaganda machine. 


4 years ago

(and as if we don't have "gun laws" )

4 years ago
  • Let's see; Katii, David, Rebecca, I and others here continually advocated for a downsized military and against foreign interventions.
  • We supported real anti intervention candidates regardless of them being "left" or "right" regardless of their domestic policies.
  • Chile, Byran. Archie, Christian and others attacked and disparaged any candidate that did not accept their supersized government political ideology.
  • The same bunch were VERY quiet about the continuing wars and the attack  on Libya. 
  • Note: Jill Stein embraced R2P, and the majority of the the trolls here voted for either Obama or Jill Stein?. Hardly anti war. Just looking for other rhetoric to justify it.
  • Suggest people in statist glass palaces would be more creditable if they didn't throw stones
4 years ago

Jim, off topic but did you hear how Obama wants to "cut spending"? First, he put our seniors on the chopping block (cut SS! RON PAUL would have made it SOLVENT - but nooooooo) to 'appease' his opposition in Congress - I suppose realizing that most in Congress are more than willing to screw the middle class. Then there's that "budget cutting," - less than 2% of which comes from actual spending cuts (on assumed annual increases) with the other 98+% of it coming from TAX HIKES. None of which "cuts spending" of course. One would think Obama fans would be PISSED OFF and SCREAMNG their heads off at Obama for volunteering to cut SS benefits that currently qualify most recipients for poverty. Granted I don't often tune into CNN, but I haven't heard the 24/7 story cycle that should have followed that bit of "news." Why do you suppose that is? Did all the middle class Obamafiles secretly agree not to oppose their president no matter how many wars he starts, no matter how many people he incarcerates for victimless crimes, or how much he sacrifices our seniors' food, shelter and medicine, or how many Goldman Sachs and Monsanto execs he appoints to control our "federal agencies and departments" ?

4 years ago

Don't hold your breath waiting for the big government bunch to complain about anything that expands government. And Obama and the congress will increase the military, the police, the prisons, the bureaucracy and regulations that the powerful corporations want to prevent competition. Then the Federal Reserve will force prices higher by expanding the money supply ruining peoples savings and retirement.  Te speculators and Wall Street will leverage assets and commodities and get richer while producing nothing. To take peoples minds off things, the warmongers will stage another war/intervention. 

Same sh!t, from the same assholes. 

4 years ago

Gun laws will not protect you from the bad guys, they will aquire guns whether we want them to or not.  When that happens, take a cue from Han Solo, and make sure you've got a good blaster at your side, kids. 

4 years ago

CHILE, CHRISTIAN, ARCHIE, What say you about ....

1. Obama's expansion of the war state.

2. Obama's offer to Congress to CUT Social Security?

3. Obama singing away your constitutional right to due process?

4. Indefinite detention of American citizens by their own military forces?

5. Lying to you about ALL of the above when he was campaigning for the WH in '08 (it's all documented -

and demented - so don't try denying it or rationalize it away').

6. All the other lies he told you in '08... like, "I will not use my DoJ to go after medical MJ"  

4 years ago

I say the same or worse would have happened under your hero Romney. And the groundwork for all this was already laid by your hero Bush. Finally, this would have happened under anyone at all because it is the American way to do these things, regardles of who is in power.



4 years ago

Where have you been Christian?  We didn't support or vote for Romney or Bush.   Neither did we support their policies.  Or them personally for that matter.  I seem to recall that Chile voted for Obama in 2008.  Sheila too.  Archie both times for Obama.  We didn't see a whole lot of difference between what Bush and Romney stand for or what Obama, Gore, Clinton or Kerry.  We are not big government/statist advocates.  We see those as leading to  the empowerment of special interests; especially corporate and other special interests, the advance of the welfare/warfare/security state, the demise of the economy and the repression of Liberty,.............  And we have been correct. 

4 years ago

Sadly, that is what you get voting for the 'status quo' dem or repub in this country.

But, isn't that what we've been saying all along?

4 years ago

Sorry, i posted and just now saw your post now, Jim... On the same page with that ...

well said.

4 years ago

Husband charged in killing of Wauwatosa police officer
Officer had been shot several times
Published On: Dec 27 2012 08:20:05 AM CST Updated On: Dec 27 2012 03:31:21 PM CST

A Wisconsin husband accused of shooting and killing his police officer wife on Christmas Eve has been ordered held on $1 million cash bond.

Ben Gabriel Sebena, of Menomonee Falls, made his initial appearance Thursday. A Milwaukee County court commissioner imposed bail and set a preliminary hearing for next week.

A criminal complaint said 30-year-old Jennifer Sebena was found lying on the pavement outside the fire department. Officers found her body early Monday after she failed to respond to radio calls during her solo patrol. She'd been shot five times in the head.

The complaint said Jennifer Sebena told a colleague about three weeks earlier that her husband had put a gun to her head.

The complaint also quotes Ben Sebena as telling investigators he'd been jealous of other men with regard to his wife.

A message left with Ben Sebena's defense attorney was not immediately returned.

Ben Sebena is a 30-year-old decorated U.S. Marine veteran who served two tours in Iraq. He was honorably discharged after he suffered severe arm and knee injuries in a 2005 mortar attack.

Jennifer Sebena was a police officer for two years in Wauwatosa, a city of 46,000 people just west of Milwaukee.

Funeral services for Jennifer Sebena will be held Saturday at Elmbrook Church in Brookfield. Visitation will be at the church from 9 a.m. to noon, with the service immediately following. Sebena will then be buried at Wisconsin Memorial park in Brookfield.

4 years ago

Christian-Hang out in the 'hood sometime where cops seemingly are never there when you need them..

4 years ago

Yeah.  Murder is a bad thing.  We should make it illegal.  

4 years ago

But why is the 'hood like that to begin with, and why isn't anyone doing anything about it?


4 years ago

Omg Xtian, are you that uneducated you don't know why there are "hoods" ??? Have you bothered to study economics and the consequences of "government intervention" even just a little bit? It's NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. . Xtian, are you going to answer that little list of questions up there ? Any of you anti-gun people here brave enough to tackle those questions - or any others littered throughout this thread? HOW WOULD YOU, ARCHIE, CHRISTIAN, & BRYAN, HAVE PREVENTED SANDY HOOK OR ANY OTHER SCHOOL SHOOTING FROM HAPPENING? ANY SUGGESTIONS?

4 years ago

Katii, it was a woman just like you that killed those kids in Sandy Hook. Your philosophy that military weapons and high capacity magazines in the hands of civilians makes America safer is wrong and Sandy Hook proves that it is wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt. If Nancy Lanza didn't have those weapons in her home she would still be alive today, and so would 25 other people.

4 years ago

Referring to the hood, why hasn't Obama et al cleaned up the chicago hood where he was community organizer before politics.  That is escalating daily with high murder rates.


Adam Lanza was disturbed and guns were immediate source for mass violence.

His mental health was slowly deteriorating and he should have had interventions early on.  More inform. will come out but guns should not have been in a home with disturbed young man.  Guns should not be sold to anyone with mental health problems and there should be a thorough background check done on all sales.  This is the problem, quick sales at gun shows and not enough inter-state information on criminal backgrounds.

You could say same thing about knives as well.


4 years ago
  • No Archie.    Advertizing "gun free zones" attracts those that want to murder the helpless to places like Sandy Hook.  I'm guessing that you were in favor of that.  if so, you made it attractive for Lanza to attack that school. You helped make sure those children could not be defended.

  • There are many ways that a nut can kill.  The largest mass killing in a US school was by a bomb.  Not a gun. 46 dead and 58 injured. 

  • On the same day as the Sandy Hook murders, 22 Chinese children were killed....Stabbed to death. There have been dozens of children killed in China by knife wielding crazies over the last several months. 

  • Also on the same day as the Sandy Hook attack,  in Clackamas, Oregon a gunman set on murdering in a crowded mall was faced down by a armed citizen.  Like the infamous incident at the New Life Church in Colorado he committed suicide when faced with armed opposition.  Both the mall incident in Oregon and the New Life Church, the crazy had enough rounds to have killed hundreds.  Instead they were stopped long before the police could have responded. 
  • It is simply impossible to remove all weapons from this country. Likewise, the police will never be able to respond instantly. Given those two truths, protecting oneself and innocents becomes the imperative.

  • As for guns being the source of homicides?  Note that Russia has almost 10X the homicide rate as the USA.  It also has the fewest guns percapita of any industrialized nation.  

This post was modified from its original form on 28 Dec, 12:04
US Justice Department Statistics
4 years ago

U.S. Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics, reports that some 82,500 crimes across the nation are stopped by law-abiding gun owners annually, while only about 270 incidents involve the law-abiding citizen killing the criminal perpetrator (police also kill an average of 400 violent criminal suspects annually). The BJS also noted that law-abiding citizens were also far less likely to be injured in crimes while using firearms defending themselves. “A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon.”

4 years ago

LOL that wasn't even a good try, Archie The TRUTH is 1) guns will never be uninvented, 2) there will never not be crazy and disturbed people, and 3) it was people like YOU that made it IMPOSSIBLE for the adults at Sandy Hook to defend themselves and all those children when a crazy person with guns decided to shoot them all. FURTHER, I would NEVER have guns where ANYone could access them, especially a person who I know is severely disturbed as Mrs. Lanza clearly knew abouther son. But ultimately, "I" am not responsible for another person's decisions. I just wouldn't make it EASIER for a predator to KNOW exactly where to go to find completely defenseless prey like you do. So, who's the one who's beliefs facilitated gun bans and "gun free zones" (may as well put out a sign that says, "Everyone here is defenseless" for the badguys to see)? That's you, big boy. Not me. Would it be great if guns had never been invented? Armies? Sure! But it's too late for that. Would it be great if there were no crazy people? Hell yeah! Not gonna happen. So, I'll ask again: How would you have prevented Sandy Hook, Archie? Got anything? If so, please share because I'm out of ideas except that the shooter 1) should never be able to trust 'gun free zones' for protection against his murder spree, which leads to 2) SOMEONE has to be able to stop a shooter in a school full of defenseless CHILDREN.

4 years ago

Archie, and other anti-self defense against bad guys and their guns, please comment on this (from Jim earlier): "US Justice Department Statistics U.S. Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics, reports that some 82,500 crimes across the nation are stopped by law-abiding gun owners annually, while only about 270 incidents involve the law-abiding citizen killing the criminal perpetrator (police also kill an average of 400 violent criminal suspects annually). The BJS also noted that law-abiding citizens were also far less likely to be injured in crimes while using firearms defending themselves. “A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon.”" -Jim

4 years ago

The majority of these mass shooting incidents are done with legally purchased firearms. The weapons of choice are semi-automatic pistols and assault rifles. These weapons spew out many rounds per second and can be reloaded almost instantly. They are military weapons, civilians have no legitimate need for them, and civilian ownership of them should be banned.

Re-instate the assault weapons ban, remove the loopholes that were in it before and include semi-automatic hand guns in the ban and thousands of lives will be saved each year. Guns do not make anyone safer. Guns kill. The more guns we have in our society, the more gun deaths we will have.. Nancy Lanza was a law abiding citizen who caused the deaths of 26 people when she purchased weapons that she had no need for, and should not have been allowed to own.

Again - there is no legitimate reason for anyone to own semi-automatic weapons. Ban them. Thousands of Americans are killed each year with legally purchased semi-automatic weapons. That can be stopped through legislation. Senator Diane Feinstein will be introducing an Assault Weapons bill in the Senate and a similar bill will be introduced in the House. Do your part to help stop this madness by contacting your representatives and demanding that they support stronger gun laws. It's time.

4 years ago

And now it comes out that the guns that were used in the Webster firefighter shooting were purchased legally. <p><p> Lax gun laws are a problem in our country that must be fixed.

4 years ago

Archie, if guns don't make you safer when bad guys also have them, then why is your dear leader surrounded by armed guards 24/7? Why is his daughter's school sporting auto-rifle equipped guards at their school? Why does every single cop carry a gun? But you didn't answer my question, not really, since criminals buy guns illegally all the time, or they steal them like the nutbar Lanza did. So, in light of that factoid, and the other one: that you can't confiscate every "assault weapon" (aren't all guns an 'assault weapon' ? Yes) - facts you completely ignore - how would you have prevented Sand Hook?

4 years ago

To say that because armed professionals can provide protection means that more citizens with guns will therefore make us safer is not rational. Stats show that people are less likely to be safe in households with a gun. And for the most part, areas with higher gun ownership have higher rates of gun homicides.


Speaking of stats, no, 22 children in China were not killed by a knife. They were wounded, as opposed to surely many being killed if the weapon was a gun.

And no, the gunman in Clackamas, OR was not stopped by an armed citizen. He sprayed fire into a crowd killing 2. Though someone did aim a gun at him, the shooter later killed himself after going to a different part of the mall.

And no, Russia doesn't have 10 times the homicide rate of the US nor does it have the fewest guns per capita of any industrialized nation.

And what Jim didn't point our from his link:

 (Because the NCVS collects victimization data
on police officers, its estimates of the use of firearms for
self-defense are likely to include police use of firearms.
Questionnaire revisions introduced in January 1993 will permit
separate consideration of police and civilian firearm cases.) 

But anything goes at BS central.

A message to the PATRIOTS only !
4 years ago

Max Igan's Show - Ask the Questions and Live the Answers -1/4 Max Igan: Ask The Questions & Live The Answers~ FULL LENGTH

(54 minutes neccessary to understand what this gun ban thing is about)

Stand to your constitution.

The Second Amendment (in this case) is the ULTIMATE CORE of your constitution - Learn why:


Max Igan Channel ~ aodscarecrow
Website ~
Facebook Page ~

Learning to 'Live Free' comes from experience and personal growth ... Lets break our conditioning!

This post was modified from its original form on 29 Dec, 11:10
4 years ago
  • Wrong again Byran.  The shooter in Oregon was confronted by an armed citizen.  Yes AFTER he fired into the crowd.  Just how would the armed citizen have known that this particular nut would have fired into the crowd before he started?  Ane like the True Life Church incident, the shooter killed himself  with a LARGE AMOUNT OF UNFIRED ROUNDS INCLUDING SOME STILL IN THE WEAPON.  Can you really be that obtuse?  And armed citizen saved the lives of countless people.  The police (professionals had not yet responded. 
  • Byran:  "To say that because armed professionals can provide protection means that more citizens with guns will therefore make us safer is not rational."??????  AGAIN, armed professionals are not present at all times and all places.  To think that that are or somehow magically appear at the exact instant they are needed is what is irrational.  There is a RESPONSE time.  And during that time the nut is killing people.  In the recent case it was Sandy Hook.  You and people like you violated the single most basic human right of all: the right of self defense You did just that by by making sure the adults had no means of defending themselves and these children. 
4 years ago
  • I stand corrected on the China incident.   But note the following: The total number of children over the last 1 1/2 years in China killed or injured by knife is as follows: "The spate of (knife) attacks left at least 25 dead and some 115 injured."
  • You have no idea how many would have been killed or injured with a gun. Or how many would have died if a citizen at any of these had a gun to protect them.
  • Homicide rate in Russia is 18/100,000 USA is 3.7/100,000 about 4X the USA. (which has 12X-15X the number of privately owned guns). The Russian homicide rate is also higher by 10X-20X higher than countries that have 4X-5X as many privately owned guns. So your claimed correlation of guns and homicides has no actual correlation by country.    Thanks for pointing that out.  
  • I used the "official" number of guns for Russia above btw, If you exclude the number of guns used by private security firms, the number of privately owned guns drops to well under 5%. Many of those guns are in rural areas. In the highest crime areas guns are scarcer in Russia. Using the Pravda figure of guns in private hands in Russia only Japan has significantly fewer guns in private hands. 
  • As far as the government data?   If you have a problem with it, take it up with them. Note that an accurate figure of the response times on violent crimes, questionable police shootings, wrongful arrests, police brutality, prosecutorial misconduct and police brutality are also difficult or impossible to get.  Which is a point likely lost on you.
4 years ago

Sure Jim... The shooter had a gun pointed at him on the second floor, then later killed himself after going to the first floor of the mall.

Nope, no correlation,

A fairer comparison would be to compare gun deaths in different places at the same time. States are laboratories for democracy, culture, and social policy. For example, my home state of New Jersey is #49 out of 50 in per-capita gun ownership. Only Hawaii is lower. And we are ranked #47 out of 50 in the rate of gun death. (These are good things – I am not enthusiastic at the thought of the cast of Jersey Shore packing heat.)

Based on statistics on gun ownership and deaths, the overall tendency is clear:

Gun Violence as a Function of Gun Ownership rates for countries with a Very High Human Development Index Score

4 years ago
  • Washington DC has the highest "gun deaths" overall also more than 50% higher than your Alaska example above. Washington DC also has the fewest number of legal guns in the USA. and is in the top 10 US cities in both homicides and violent crime.
  • But I notice you use "gun death" Byran. Not homicide. Not violent crime. Therefore you are not really arguing about guns as crime/violence. You are including a safety issue and misuse issue. If you wish to bring that into a discussion, then that opens up the door to safety and misuse of other potentially dangerous things. Tools, auto, sports equipment, household products, etc..... Let's not bother to make this a debate over the nanny State controlling everything we do. It's a waste of time. 
  • Take your example New Jersey. As you point out, that state has a low gun ownership. Let's take a look at a city in New Jersey. Newark. Under 300,000 people but homicide is 32/100,000. 5th in the nation. In the top 20 in violent crime with over 1,000 incidents per 100,000. VERY high in aggravated assault. 
  • Again, lets use NJ. As a state. Murder rate is 3.7/100,000. 22ed in the nation. 19th lowest in violent crime. Not too bad. Almost as good as Kentucky which is has the 9th lowest violent crime rate...... And the highest per capita gun ownership. In fact in the 5 states that have the highest gun ownership per capita, 4 have lower violent crime rates than New Jersey. Of the 10 states that have highest per capita gun ownership, 7 have a lower violent crime rate than New Jersey.
  • Hawaii is 7th in homicides at 1.8/100,000 very good. New Hampshire has the lowest murder rate. It ranks 13th highest in gun ownership. Vermont, Utah, Iowa, Idaho and Minnesota all have lower murder rates than Hawaii. Of those states, only Vermont has fewer than average guns/capita than the rest of the nation. Utah has the 2ed highest gun ownership..... also the 4th lowest homicide rate and very low crime rate.
  • Hawaii ranks and impressive 10th in the lowest crime rate. But high gun ownership states also rate at or lower in violent crime than Hawaii. For example Kentucky has the highest gun ownership per capita in the nation and has a LOWER violent crime rate than Hawaii. In fact 5 of the top 15 states in per capita gun ownership have a LOWER violent crime rate than Hawaii.  ( Kentucky, New Hampshire,  Utah, Wyoming,  Idaho and North Dakota).  Maine, Wisconsin, and Oregon also  have lower violent crime rates than Hawaii and have average or higher gun ownership. . 
  • The examples by you Byran given can be easily dismissed.   There are multiple studies including the one by the National Academy of Sciences on US gun regulation  that were unable to show where gun laws had any positive effect on reducing crime or injuries.  The international study by Gates and Mauser show the same thing. 
  • Regardless, I understand you want to take guns away from the people of this country and do further damage to a Constitution that is already being systemically dismantled. You want the government to have more power and more control. You don't like limits on government. You ignore what evil the State does and put your efforts into advancing a political agenda. Effectively you support an increasingly despotic and corrupt State.  We've seen this  happen many times in history. It always ends badly.


This post was modified from its original form on 30 Dec, 1:21
4 years ago

I guess you think that fumbling with his gun and seeing Meli pull out his hand gun had nothing to do with the fact that the Clackamas shooter shot himself shortly after. And the New Life Church gunman killed himself after he was fired upon. There are a number of similar incidents.    

ban all knives too !
4 years ago
Man on Psychiatric drugs who beheaded and cannibalized fellow passenger on Greyhound bus thought he was attacking an alien

Read more:
Foto: Man on Psychiatric drugs who beheaded and cannibalized fellow passenger on Greyhound bus thought he was attacking an alien 

Read more:
4 years ago

This is a highly unusual incident to the extreme.

If he had a gun would he have used it as I bet the victem never saw it coming.

Knife wounds inflicted right are fatal.

Another tragic subway murder in NYC and that is pushing unsuspecting riders over the rails when train approaches.


These are extreme deaths and far from the norm, thank God for that!

4 years ago

This is the bottom line, all that needs to be considered in light of that thing called REALITY - that CRIMINALS don't obey "gun laws," JUST like they don't obey MURDER LAWS... . . . "You and people like you violated the single most basic human right of all: the right of self defense You did just that by by making sure the adults had no means of defending themselves and these children." -Jim

4 years ago

...and do further damage to a Constitution that is already being systemically dismantled. You want the government to have more power and more control. You don't like limits on government. You ignore what evil the State does and put your efforts into advancing a political agenda. Effectively you support an increasingly despotic and corrupt State.  We've seen this  happen many times in history. It always ends badly. --Jim

Yep, pretty much the same wacky response here, regardless of the subject and of what anybody has actually said.

4 years ago

What hunter hunts with an mk47 or the likes of that ?   Are these necessary ?

What is their purpose ?   Shouldn't the govt. scrutinize an owner who buys this type of gun ?


4 years ago

SL, the 2nd Amendment does not exist to protect your right to hunt for food with a firearm. The 2nd doesn't say a damned thing about hunting. Have you read the 2nd? Or is it your agenda to Amend the Constitution to restrict gun ownership according to what you think Utopia should be like?

4 years ago

Gee Sheila.  Is it "necessary" to have a large car?  A nice house?  Or anything else?  Who decides?  The government?  That is a very slippery slope.  


4 years ago

Do we need to explain to anyone what the "purpose" of what we own is?  

4 years ago
  • Didn't think you'd "get it" Byran. If it isn't consistent with your ideology you will think it is "wacky" or "loony" or whatever. Your conditioning is quite impressive. Here is the difference between us. I don't seek to impose a ideology on you using government coercion and force.
  • You are intolerant of the beliefs of others. I am not. I only resist attempts to limit my freedom and liberty. Where I would defend your rights, you seek to take those rights and liberties from others. You seek to do that on a national basis so none can escape your despotic agenda.
  • You think that your ideas and ideals are noble and advance the human condition. Many have thought that. Included are those who claimed any that resisted their "noble" cause were "loony" or "wacky" or "crazy". A number of those that harmed no one were imprisoned, tortured or murdered.
  • Indeed, I and other libertarians, for merely stating our beliefs and resisting, have been threatened by those that style themselves "progressives". The threats used have included: confiscation of property, imprisonment, denial of voting rights, exile and execution. Although these are a minority, I have noticed that there have been few that have disclaimed those that are openly advocating these actions against us.
  • A lesser example of such are the recent declaration by a New Hampshire Democrat that "Free Staters are the single biggest threat the state is facing today". and they should be discouraged from moving to NH by passing "measures that will restrict the freedoms that they think they will find here." . Very open minded.
  • A brief internet search shows zero examples of any region or a political figure calling for measures to discourage progressives from moving into an state or region.
  • Interesting that a avowed progressive has called for legislation limiting freedoms in order to prevent libertarians from moving to a state....... Killing two birds with one stone perhaps?
4 years ago

The MK 47 is a paintball gun Sheila.  You think the government should, "scrutinize an owner who buys this type of gun". 

Those nasty 'assault weapons'
4 years ago

Can anyone in Washington define “assault weapon”?

Can Barack Obama?

Can Dianne Feinstein?

It is a meaningless term designed by people like Feinstein, who would prefer to ban all or most firearms, specifically to confuse the public.

Yesterday, Obama said on “Meet the Press” that he would work hard on banning “assault weapons” and what he calls “high-capacity magazines.”

Of course, definitions were in short supply.

So what is an “assault weapon”?

Quite simply, it’s whatever the government says it is.

Does that shock you?

In the past, so-called “assault weapons” have been banned for manufacture and sale to citizens of the U.S. merely on the basis of what they look like, not because they behave any differently from ordinary semi-automatic weapons that fire one round at a time.

Automatic weapons, which fire multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger, have been strictly regulated under gun control laws since 1934.

But in 1994, Congress took a step toward banning semi-automatic weapons, which represent the vast majority of firearms sold and purchased by citizens in the U.S., by adopting the meaningless term “assault weapons” based solely on how they look and how “scary” they sound.

That’s when certain models of AR-15s were banned, along with AK-47s, even though they are simply semi-automatic weapons like most other rifles manufactured and sold. For instance, the 1994 law banned semiautomatic rifles with a pistol grip and a bayonet mount. In addition, the law also restricted some magazines that carried more than 10 rounds. In all, 18 firearms models were banned.

At the time, it wasn’t important to gun-grabbers that their action was a mere gesture. It served two purposes:

1)      It set a precedent for future classifications of firearms as “assault weapons” that could be banned;

2)      It allowed legislators to feel good about themselves and to suggest to their anti-gun constituencies that  they were doing something to further their cause;

Now, here we are at the end of 2012, following the horrific massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and it’s time for phase two of the war on the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

Keep in mind, the choice of weapon by the shooter at the school would have made no difference. Little children and unarmed teachers and administrators would not have been able to stop the slaughter of those kids if he had come in armed with a shotgun or a revolver.

That’s where Obama and Feinstein intentionally insert confusion into the debate – along with their lapdogs in the media who parrot the term “assault weapons” as if it means something.

Just because a firearm looks like a military weapon doesn’t make it any more dangerous, even in the hands of a maniac or a serial killer, than any other gun that fires one round at a time.

So what motivates this “assault weapons” hysteria?

It’s very simple. It’s part of a plan to render the intent of the Second Amendment null and void.

read more:

Jews Lead Gun Control Charge
4 years ago

Actually Brother Nathanael made a mistake.

The caption should read Zionists Lead Gun Control Charge...

- Parsifal

4 years ago

Well, Jim and Katii, 

You certainly should be proud that you and Parsifal are arguing the same point.

4 years ago

" Or is it your agenda to Amend the Constitution to restrict gun ownership according to what you think Utopia should be like?"

The 2nd amendment say that we have the right to keep and bear arms.  It does not say that we have a right to every single weapon ever developed nor does it say that we have a right to not have to register those arms. 

Hunting?  Not, it does not mention hunting but it does mention militia.  Does that mean that ONLY militia members are allowed to keep arms?  Is anyone here a member of the militia?

I always have mixed feelings on guns.  My personal opinions are probably more in line with Sheilas.  I didn't grow up with guns in my home and don't ever want to have guns in my home.  I sincerely hope our country never gets to that point.

4 years ago

Chuck Woolery on Assault Weapons

250 Million Innocent Civilians Exterminated
4 years ago

250 Million Innocent Civilians Exterminated by Their Own Government in the Past 100 years!

NEVER, EVER, EVER, GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS! Throughout recorded history Gun Control Legislation has ALWAYS led to eventual Gun Confiscation which has ALWAYS been followed by the MASS MURDER of innocent men, women, and children at the hands of their very own Governments! (This does NOT include soldiers who died in battle.  These deaths were Extermination / Genocide)

You may think this could never happen in your lifetime, and maybe you’re right.  But, it’s our children and grandchildren who are growing up in a totalitarian police state and because most of you remain SILENT, our kids think this is completely normal!

Our LAST remaining right (9 of the 10 are already GONE), is coming under attack!  Are you willing to give up our VERY LAST Constitutional protection?  If so, it’s the beginning of the end for our posterity.  Without exception, history records prove that once tyrants have taken over a government, they wait for most of the “old timers” to die and then begin to slaughter an entire generation!

The time to wake up, look around, and say “hum, our Government doesn’t seem to have the best interests of future generations in mind” isn’t when you are so old you can’t resist.

If OUR Generation keeps ignoring the flashing red lights and we go to our graves without so much as a whimper, our kids will NEVER forgive our incredible negligence.  Watch the movie below and THINK for just a few minutes about the reality of our situation.  And turn off the TV!

This thread is archived. To reply to it you must re-activate it.

New to Care2? Start Here.