Tomorrow NOON

[likeemfast]

Hey Mo5000, Maybe someone should do a study if you might possibly think better after you eat something or have someone swab some peanut butter in your mouth before you log on to the board, see if that helps. You are way off once again. Becoming a chronic problem for you isnt it?

[bucks better beagles]

A divergent opinion seems personally dangerous on this topic. The only time I ever saw a cop fire his AR was at a dog chasing horses. He killed the dog, ricocheted off a horse and hit a propane tank 200 yards away. Dumbest thing I ever saw but, that is a Michigan cop for ya.

[Bev]

Bev--- I have several things I want to address with you.... please hear me out before getting upset or angry..

1. I am not a democrat.... NOT EVEN CLOSE.. I only vote for them when the republicans act like whiny babies because they lost.. Fox news is insufferable and their hypocrisy gets shown literally EVERY SINGLE DAY...Its so funny when they show before and after videos of their pundits saying one thing and then when a dem does it, saying the exact opposite.. They even go in public and tell people they won the house by gerrymandering and tried to win the presidency by refusing suffrage to elderly and poor people who don't have id's even though there hasn't been ONE credible case of voter id fraud in the past 30 years.

First of all, I'm not angry. I've had this message board for about 12 years now, and it's not the first debate I've been in - even though it wasn't a debate until you posted. But for your insistence that you're nowhere near being a Democrat, I'll defer to such great adages as, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..."

2. I don't care one way or another about Roe V. Wade but I think if your against the best thing to do is convince people not to have abortions and make the law obsolete..

You make a good point. We should convince people not to break the law; instead of restricting the hands of those who obey the law, just in case the criminals can't be convinced. Got it.

3. I find it HIGHLY HIGHLY offensive for you to quip about me making things up.. Here is the REPUBLICAN version of the support of the things Obama is proposing. http://fox4kc.com/2013/01/14/poll-gun-c ... s-support/ For a non partisan view go to Nate Silver's site and if you average in everything Obama is proposing it averages to right over 60 percent. Some things are more than 80 percent and some are around 40 but the average support is 60 percent.. You can have your opinions but you do not get your own set of facts.

I find it highly highly amusing that you would presume yourself informed enough about guns to go toe-to-toe with a career law enforcement officer, lol. That aside, I'm sorry you're so easily offended. I didn't set out to offend you, but had I known you'd take offense anyway, I would have put a little more effot into it. But if it makes the sting a little less, I don't trust any mainstream media - including Fox. I call them the PFM, which is short for Poo-Flinging Monkeys, all of them. But calling Nate Silver non-partisan is like calling Tom Selleck a queer. (I haven't begun to tap my offensive prowess)

4. Yes, posting pictures of suffering people will stir up emotional support for your cause.. I don't happen to have pictures of 20 blown off children's heads from Sandy hook to show you or any other of the 50,000 plus victims of a firearm per year either to help my cause. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violen ... ted_States. I suppose your right to have a 100rd banana clip is more important than those kids. I do know that if the government really wanted your guns, they could take them.. Really, they could.... Or the supreme court could have upheld limitations to the 2nd amendment and chipped away at them BUT THEY DIDN'T they upheld it.. And consistently do so..

Posting pictures of what our government actually did - put it's own citizens of Japanese descent BEHIND WIRE is a reminder to history of what can happen when the government has a knee-jerk reaction. It's not designed to draw sympathy for the people in the picture. I can't believe you don't get that point, but then I guess you just ... don't. It didn't and hasn't happened to you, ergo - it can never happen. If you think we have become so evolved that we're past this, in my opinion you're deluded. At the end of this post you will see a picture of a warning given to the citizens of Indiana by a President - long before the country decided to indefinitely detain it's Japanese population. It was true then, and it's true now. You cannot outrun history.

But you're right, posting pics of 20 kids with their heads blown off wouldn't better promote your cause, because it wasn't the guns but the man behind the guns who did it. However, I can tell you this; if Sandy Hook had had an armed security guard posted on the premises, Adam Lanza would have never stepped foot near those children. Mass shooters never willingly walk into a war zone. They go where they know they will meet no resistance. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. Keep up the good work trying to make us all sitting ducks. I am having no part of it. I will become a lawbreaker first. My advice? Pick your battles. It isn't worth pi$sing off the entire armed public over semantics. The gun laws we have are fine if they're enforced. Additional laws are just ineffective fodder to appease the left that something is being done.

5, Yes, comparing the stooges is CLEARLY like playing first person shooters where you can literally rape and watch people who look pretty realistic get blown away by the thousands for no reason. Or watching BRUTAL murders on tv from age 2 to 20. That kind of stuff has an effect on people that didn't happen with Ozzie and Harriet. Your argument that this is comparing apples to apples is ludicrous.

If you really believe that, then there's your fight. THERE'S YOUR RED LIGHT ISSUE, not gun control. We didn't need the bloody-gory sensation to be entertained; that's your generation's thirst. But even so, I'd like to see some real statistics about the number of people who play these games and go rogue, compared to the number of people who went rogue on a crowd of people before the games were invented. Contrary to your beliefs, these mass killings are no more frequent than they've ever been. And they've been going on since the days of muskets. (If you need sources, I'll be happy to dig them up. ) As kids, we had easier access to guns than kids do these days - HELL, we got them as Christmas gifts, but we didn't go out and shoot up our class with them.

ps. thank you for running the board, you do a great job but on this subject you are on the wrong side of history.

You're welcome. Having voted in 11 presidential elections, I feel I have more history to draw upon than you, but here's some history I know I'm not on the wrong side of: We had an assault weapons (semi-auto) ban in effect for ten years and it didn't budge the crime rate or death by gun rate one iota. It was a useless piece of legislation because it doesn't address the real problem, and neither Democrats or Republicans saw any point in renewing it.

Restricting is infringement, and Infringement is unconstitutional, period, and any elected official who disobeys the Constitution has committed treason. If you or anyone else expects gun rights advocates to roll over so misguided feel-gooders can modify those rights to suit them, good luck with all that. We're accustomed to the Left presuming to know what's best for everyone, and trying to make their opinions law. You'll have an easier time taking your own advice; you will have to try to make the 2nd Amendment obsolete. Good luck with all that.


For those of you who oppose any new legislation, to whom I addressed my original post anyway, here are a few pics from the Indiana rally. I have many more on my facebook page, and so does Guns Across America's facebook page.

My son, Ryan and me preparing to head downtown.




Ryan, and my 15-year-old grandson, Sam.


Sam and is grandmama in the background march.


Hundreds, perhaps as many as 1,000 showed for the event on little notice. they came from all over the state.


I like the lady's sign in front of me, lol.




We'd do well to remember this one.


Because of mandates laid down by our forefathers and early leaders who knew a Republic wouldn't last left alone, and would have to constantly be fought for.


I can move this thread to the Gun Legislation forum when it gets cold.

One more thing. bucks, why do you feel debating is personally dangerous? Hyperbole much?

[Mo. Beagler 5000]

The kid from Sandy stole those guns and used them in a gun free zone. Did any existing laws stop him? NO so why would new ones stop him? Sorry Mo. but you seem a bit naive. Maybe you should get out a bit more.

"The SCARY part to me is HE is TEACHING CHILDREN"

Ya, the guy with bachelor's degree and a master's degree from a major University is teaching your kids...Maybe we should just have religious fanatics teaching our kids so we can become more like Iran... Thats really what the fundies want anyways.. Why educate kids when you can just indoctrinate right?

I have been teaching for 5 years and 4 of the 5 years I have taught my students have scored WELL ABOVE average on testing. That is a public fact. School is NOT A PLACE TO EXPRESS PERSONAL OPINIONS. If you think the things I say in this board or any other forums is what I say in my classroom, you are sadly mistaken. I teach science and social studies nothing in the curriculum deals with personal opinions on politics and the government.. Thats the difference between me and the republican party... I realize people can have Valid disagreements with me without being offended or acting like its a personal attack although it always end up that way with a lot of people on here.


BEV-- I suppose we will agree to disagree about gun legislation. Thank for your thought out answers rather than knee jerk reaction.

to the rest of you... do we even know if sandy hook had video? I have only been to a few schools that did.. don't you think most people can tell the difference between a shotgun blast and and a riffle? Hundreds of witnesses heard more shots than could have been produced by a shotgun.. watch the video.. the gun they pull out of his trunk is a shotgun.... No one could mistake that for a bushmaster. Sure they could have got hundreds of teachers and students to lie and set the whole thing up but seriously, you think if it was a conspiracy they would forget to plant the right gun on the guy? And also one of his victims is saying it was a riffle and not a shotgun... Why would she lie or be in on it? There is too many people who know what he used to get away with a lie..

[Bev]

mo beagler, we can debate until we're blue in the face. The only thing that matters is that those children had no defense. None. They never stood a chance because nobody felt they were as precious as the money sitting in the local bank, which does get armed guards. Adam Lanza was armed to the teeth with guns he didn't lawfully acquire. The bushmaster still only spits out one bullet per trigger pull, just like a 2-shot Derringer. With no resistence, Adam Lanza was free to have in each hand those New York safe 7-shot pistols, in 5 seconds swap magazines out on each one time, and done the same damage. Trying to nitpick magazine capacity is what's ludicrous. It's foolish, it's time-wasting in my opinion, and will serve nothing except Progressive rage, which seems to be all the rage.

[warddog]

I'm kinda liberal at times but that doesn't make me "A Liberal." I'm also very conservative at times and that doesn't make me "A conservative." I do believe in the language of our US Constitution along with the Amendments and that makes me an "American!" I firmly believe this country was founded on the principle of FREEDOM and in my book that means an "INDIVIDUAL'S" right to choose regardless of any political point of view. Isn't this why our forefathers came to and founded this country in the first place?
In my eyes when I read the words "WE THE PEOPLE" and "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" is pretty clear. Back then the protectors of life and liberty were the individual person's who at times may have became a group, of people. The founders came here to found a land of PERSONAL freedoms commonly known as a Bill of Rights but after years of the good life, greed and political power has history returning to a land of tyranny by [ALL] politicians and I see neither of the two major parties free from infringing upon an individual's right to choose, period! NO, I don't have nor need an assault weapon to hunt. I also do not need a 30 round clip to hunt BUT what I do need is my individual right to that inalienable choice. I have taken the oath and served for those rights before but I will fight for them forever!

[Big Mike]

MO, I am very disappointed in your thoughts on the gun control issue. Giving up a little here and a little there only leads down one road. How long before they limit how much ammo you are allowed to keep at any one time??

keep in mind that it was Reagan that laid a wreath on the grave of the "unknown Nazi" and he and the republicans initiated the first weapons ban. So don't be fooled by right wing rhetoric. With that said, please share with us what the second Amendment says about massacring first graders in their class room?

[Bev]

Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say those rights are conditional on the behavior of criminals? The 2nd Amendment wasn't written to address acts of violence except in the condition that you have the right to protect yourself from them. You want less gun violence? Control violent people.

[Bev]

I imagine everyone's seen this, but in case not, it's only 4 minutes of your life. This is the main reason why we won't budge an inch, mo beagler:

https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=fGaDAThOHhA

[Pine Lakes]

While we are conversing, can we discuss the 30,000+ annual deaths caused by automobiles? How about the thousands of innocent people killed by explosives made with chemicals meant for farming and/or cleaning? What about the thousands of innocent people killed with knifes, beaten with ball bats, suffocated with pillows, overdosed on perscription drugs? This is simply the liberal left pushing their special interests, and anyone that would see logic in their argument is, for lack of better words, stupid and gullable. Personally, I have had my fill of these people and I am hoping the opportunity to free us all of these tyrants comes soon. I don't want my children to fight this battle. Mo Beagler 5000 you claim to have no political affiliation with those that attack our rights, but I say you, and anyone that would choose to agree with their point of view are one in the same. You also made an attempt to attack Fox News, but made no comment about any liberal media's biased positions taken. You appear to be a fairly intelligent individual, so I would beg of you to use that intelligence to reconsider your position and relay that onto others that are misinformed and mislead.

[Mo. Beagler 5000]

Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say those rights are conditional on the behavior of criminals? The 2nd Amendment wasn't written to address acts of violence except in the condition that you have the right to protect yourself from them. You want less gun violence? Control violent people.

Where in the second amendment does it mention the right to have a hand grenade or a bazooka or for that matter an f-16 or a ak-47.. CLEARLY had we of had weapons of mass destruction and repeating arms they would have made a different choice of wording..

Abortion isn't in the constitution and yet republicans fight against that liberty all the time. Democrats also have their issues with the constitution.. Its like the bible. Everyone has a different opinion as the the exact meaning.. The 2nd amendment was to protect us for a tyrannical government. It never mentions you could have them being toted down the street and use them for any whim you may have. So technically, if they wanted to say you could only have a gun if you were in a "well regulated militia" they would be within the letter of the law.

Maybe none of it will help.... but its immoral and irresponsible to not try something. If i have to give up some liberty to save innocent people, sign me up.

I still contend our government doesn't want your guns.... they want to stop crime and since the republicans won't allow tax dollars to be spent on poor people or to study this problem we have then guns are really the only thing they can go after....

[Mo. Beagler 5000]

While we are conversing, can we discuss the 30,000+ annual deaths caused by automobiles? How about the thousands of innocent people killed by explosives made with chemicals meant for farming and/or cleaning? What about the thousands of innocent people killed with knifes, beaten with ball bats, suffocated with pillows, overdosed on perscription drugs? This is simply the liberal left pushing their special interests, and anyone that would see logic in their argument is, for lack of better words, stupid and gullable. Personally, I have had my fill of these people and I am hoping the opportunity to free us all of these tyrants comes soon. I don't want my children to fight this battle. Mo Beagler 5000 you claim to have no political affiliation with those that attack our rights, but I say you, and anyone that would choose to agree with their point of view are one in the same. You also made an attempt to attack Fox News, but made no comment about any liberal media's biased positions taken. You appear to be a fairly intelligent individual, so I would beg of you to use that intelligence to reconsider your position and relay that onto others that are misinformed and mislead.

AUTOMOBILE DEATH ARE ACCIDENTS-- HOMICIDE IS NOT AN ACCIDENT! It NEVER WILL BE..

Free us of what tyrants??? The MAJORITY of people who disagree with you. See this is my whole problem with a lot of conservatives. This hyperbole is stupid, the extremism and fanaticism you speak about is sickening.. You act so oppressed.. try living somewhere else if you think we are oppressed.. you haven't seen anything. This exaggerated speech has no place in civilized society. We aren't fighting for our lives. We are having a discussion about gun control..

Ya, Rachel maddow and msnbc have ridiculous ideas too but they don't call for people to rise up against the government and are mostly harmless in their actions.

[Bev]

Where in the second amendment does it mention the right to have a hand grenade or a bazooka or for that matter an f-16 or a ak-47..

Right next to the word "muskets."

We the People have a right to bear arms, the same type of arms that would be used against us. If that were not the intent of the 2nd Amendment, how did they expect us to fight down a tyrannical government? These semi-autos that the uninformed are calling "assault rifles," and the over 10 semi-auto pistols that Obama wants banned, is law enforcement allowed to carry them? Swat teams? If they are allowed, then so are the people.

THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve ... UNLESS ... it is the government's intention to be more powerful than the people.

[Mo. Beagler 5000]

That photo is awesome!! Nicely done... lmfao

[APFII]

Sounds to me like some of you are afraid to go to sleep at night without your assault rifle with a 30 round clip under your pillow. My old shotgun in the corner will do me just fine. Do not be afraid of President Obama , it is the ones wraped in the flag ,and carrying the bible ,that I worry about.