text:
Bruce Rogers, Forbes Staff
I'm Forbes' Chief Insights Officer & write about thought leadership.
The gun control debate is clearly one of the most contentious and controversial issues in America today. And the battle over gun control is now being waged through intensive media campaigns from both sides of the political spectrum to influence public opinion and to assert pressure on policy makers. So who's winning? To find out, we turned to objective data provided exclusively to Forbes Insights by Appinions, the influence marketing platform. Keep in mind Forbes Insights has no agenda other than to shed research light on the process of measuring influence and what we can learn from it. The facts are objective, whatever your perspective on the issue may be. We certainly don't aim to promote either side and are just stating the facts of influence and who is leading or gaining ground through the lens of influence.
Forbes Insights and Appinions looked at the data for the week prior to the Sandy Hook tragedy and trended the data over the subsequent 5 weeks to determine the ebb and flow over the gun control debate. We found that the NRA and the pro-gun rights voices are winning the influence battle and will continue to be strong and more influential if the pro gun control voice remains fragmented. On the flip side, the pro gun control voice could certainly gain influence if they establish a more united voice. Here are some other interesting observations from the data:
Republican politicians are missing from the debate. The debate is an influence battle between President Barack Obama's Democrats and Wayne LaPierre's NRA. Of the top 25 stakeholders in the debate, there is only 1 prominent Republican politician (Chris Christie – who is pro-gun control). Barack Obama leads the pro-gun control voice with a net influence score of 268. LaPierre leads the anti-gun control side with a net influence score of 240.
It's a Marathon, not a sprint. It seems the NRA has the stamina to out-run the pro-gun control movement. They are persistent, un-yielding and gaining influence. It will be interesting to see how the pro-gun control voice responds and how the influence between the two groups changes as the debate persists.
The pro-gun rights voice is rapidly gaining influence while the pro-gun control voice has tapered in recent weeks. Momentum is shifting and the gun control debate is becoming a platform benefiting gun rights advocates.
The pro–gun control group is fragmented whereas the pro-gun rights voice is united and strong. Of the top influencers on the pro-gun rights side, the majority of the most prominent voices are from the NRA. The pro-gun control voice is split between Obama and several gun control advocacy groups which dilutes the message.
Below is an infographic meant to bring this data to life.
Appinions is an innovative data-mining company that measures influence by extracting and aggregating opinions from over 5 million sources including blogs, social networks, forums, and newspaper and magazine articles.
Appinions defines "influencer" as "an individual who expresses a contextually relevant opinion that is meaningful enough to elicit action from others." Appinions also tracks "share of influence"—the aggregate measure of all influencers and their related score on a particular topic. The company calculates scores based on an individual influencer's opinions for a given topic. Scores are determined by frequency of actions the opinions generate; credibility of the publications in which the opinions appear; and diversity of publications carrying the opinions.
For more information on the methodology, visit www.appinions.com.
You might also like…
I am a NRA member. I do not support any bans on weapons or magazines. I don't understand why I keep hearing about mental health but all I am seeing is bills that take away my rights. The are focusing on what is a easy bill to ban things.
Joe Biden: 'We Don't Have Time To Prosecute Everybody Who Lies' On Background Checks
Well if we don't enforce the current laws and can't. What is more laws gonna do. Quit trying to figure out ways to take away rights and do your current job.
You mean the government should do its jobs previously blocked by NRA backed Republican law makers? Like the Tiahrt Amendment made into law by NRA backed Republicans? Like NRA backged republicans creating a law that says a new ATF director need congressional approval and then having NRA backed republicans block every ATF Director appointment? Like NRA ending the research by CDC on gun violence and then complaining that we don't have all the facts?
I hope you understand that your money to the NRA is spent not to protect your rights but to protect the sales of more weapons.
geng0610 DON'T PATRONIZE ME and the other gun owners. I believe that our Second Amendment rights are important and I see what kind of impact gun control has on crime. When you take away the guns from criminals and tyrants I will consider disarming everyone. Start with the criminals and, if you do not succeed, do not ask law abiding citizens to give up their means of defense. If you don't want to own a firearm it is your prerogative. GUN CONTROL = MORE CRIME
I'm not an NRA member. That being said, I support most of what they're trying to do. The only thing I take offense with is their contempt for violence in video games. Anything more restrictions than what we already have has been deemed unconstitutional and won't pass anyway.
I don't know anything about money that goes toward gun manufacturers, but I suspect that's a ploy by gun "safety" advocates to put a greed spin on anyone that tries to protect our rights. If their money does go to protect the sale of more weapons. FANTASTIC. More people should be armed, especially in their homes. More people should apply for carry permits and CARRY weapons. Humans exert control one of two ways, either through persuasion or force. When you arm everyone equally, you remove force from the equation. It's an equalizer for everyone whether they're old and frail or small or whatever may be the case. When you remove force from the equation, the only recourse left to exert control is through persuasion and that's a lot less violent, don't you think?
Oh yes, the dog whistle call with "tyrant." Please name one that's directly affected you. And you can't say "Obama," because real tyrants don't ask Congress to do X and Y about any given issue.
I want to know: where is my right to pursue life, liberty and happiness? Hmm? I seem to have to give up my fundamental right so that you can have a gun. Precisely what battle have you engaged in, hmm? What frontline are you on that requires my rights to be second-class to yours?
I've long given up thinking that the "vast majority" of NRA members (which you claim you are not) don't think like the leadership. This is clearly wrong. A curse on all of you: not even a stack of dead bodies gives you pause, but to ask: "What does this mean for me?"
Yours is the assumption that gun-control advocates make that is fundamentally wrong and unjust: you say, "I seem to have to give up my fundamental right so that you can have a gun." Well, this would be true if you were speaking to a criminal that is or has violently assaulted you with a gun, but if you say this to completely innocent, law-abiding gun owners who have never attacked you and never will, then you are in the wrong.
In other words, the basic faulty assumption that all gun-control advocates make is that a gun owner or the gun itself, by merely existing, will commit violence, and that is simply not true. Aside from the many millions of times guns are used to prevent crimes (I can count two times in my own life) by civilians and law enforcement and military alike, the fact remains that just having a gun does not necessarily result in the commission of a violent crime.
As for your "Please name [a tyrant] that's directly affected you" demand, you need to read the book "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable" by Nassim Taleb. In it, he describes the point of view of a turkey for the 1000 days before Thanksgiving. During those thousand days, the turkey thinks the farmer's his best friend, feeding him fat every day. But we all know that that's a fool's view, until the farmer butchers the turkey Thanksgiving morning. From the farmer's point of view, the turkey's death is all part of the plan, but the turkey never saw it coming. The same goes for your specious tyrant argument. Just because a tyrant hasn't butchered us yet IS NOT PROOF that we'll never be butchered by a tyrant. It's just the 1000 or so days leading up to our surprise deaths.
(On top of that, Obama has already taken many executive actions as end-runs around Congress–one of which was recently struck down in court: his attempt to appoint NRLB members without Senate approval. So yes, he is behaving somewhat like a tyrant. Remember as above, just because he hasn't done anything super-evil yet doesn't mean he won't.)
Taleb makes the best argument for guns without even talking about them. He mentions "optionality," the option to respond to an adverse circumstance. Guns are that option for any person willing to keep that option. It is the insurance policy against the unthinkable, and many of us would prefer to keep the option of self-defense while many of you would demand that we sacrifice that option without giving us anything else to protect us. (You can't say the cops are there to protect us: Warren v. District of Columbia established that the police have no duty or obligation to protect us or provide for our defense.)
Exactly what "right" have you given up so that I can own a gun?
Please explain how my gun ownership prevents you from pursuing happiness?
I just don't understand why these people are so afraid of law abiding citizens owning guns. How do I infringe on Mr. Gonzalez's "fundamental right" to life by owning a gun? Criminals and nutcases kill people. There is no way to prevent all violence or insanity. Look at the animals slaughtering each other in Chicago and other cities over drugs and "beef". This is where 90% of gun violence occurs, and it almost invariably involves handguns. Why is it that this does not happen in the poor rural area in PA where I live? I would say it has everything to do with inner city culture and laws preventing law abiding citizens from protecting themselves. Being an American means supporting the right to bear arms, civilian gun ownership, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. If you don't like the present state of affairs, by all means, help to find a way to fix the problem, but LEAVE OUR GUNS OUT OF IT.
Elian, your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shouldn't infringe upon mine. If you choose to go naked in the world and be a perpetual victim, that is your right. Benjamin Franklin, wiser than any of the politicians alive today, said anyone who gives up essential freedoms for safety, deserve neither. I, along with millions of others, who cherish our freedoms, do no wish to be victims… and, if some underprivileged Obamaphile decides to inflict harm or take something of mine or my family, they will get their final reward.
How does armed Free Men violate your rights? How about infringing upon criminals 'rights' by imprisoning or executing them?
Umm.You are wrong about the ATFE.
Congressional approval is justified for such a powerful position…as many positions of authority also require Congressional approval. There have been many acting directors under both parties over the past 20 years…again check your history.
With terrible events such as Waco and Ruby Ridge to name just two…Congress better be watching federal law enforcement agencies…as they are supposed to…just like local and state governments do…or is it that you prefer a more totalitarian solution???? Karl Marx got you by the tongue????
Also, dear primitive imbecile, the NRA is the pre-eminent training organization of firearm safety to both civilians and law enforcement. They are in fact "codified" in many state laws as the agency to seek for firearm safety courses…which are requisites for a concealed firearms permit or, as in Connecticut…just to OWN a firearm. OK Skippy???? So get your facts straight and stop getting your propaganda from the bathroom wall over at Media Matters…jerk.
"where is my right to pursue life, liberty and happiness?"~Elian G.
Simple. The courts have concluded that the police have no general duty to protect individuals. You can check that out in Warren v. District of Columbia. Our right to life, liberty and happiness is assured in the second amendment with the right to keep and bear arms. There has been some talk that the right of individuals to keep and bear arms is a gray area, that the right was intended to apply to a state type militia. That was all cleared up in Heller v. District of Columbia when the Supreme Court found that "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.".
This was clarified in McDonald v Chicago rulings:
"In McDonald v. Chicago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the right to keep and bear arms extends to individuals in each of the 50 U.S. states. "
There you have your assurances of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It lies in your right to self defense and unreasonable intrusion. There is no legislation indicating the police or any other entity is responsible for your safety in your pursuits. That was covered in the 2A. Otherwise, there would be lawsuits galore against police departments for malfeasance and dereliction of duties with every crime they failed to intervene on.
Elian -
" … real tyrants don't ask Congress to do X and Y about any given issue."
Your knowledge of history is abysmal. Lenin, Mao, and Ho Chi Minh were strong advocates of democracy and human rights before they gained power and began executing tens of millions of people. The Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (in several revisions) is quite as democratic and protective of human rights as our own Constitution. The only thing that would have prevented those Marxist psychopaths from executing all those people would have been Second Amendment rights.
Rather ironic that someone making your absurd argument chooses the name Elian Gonzalez. You ask about tyrants and yet your name was of a little Cuban refugee who escaped to freedom in the US with his mother who died in the effort.
Family members were taking care of young Elian and one night Clinton's jackbooted thugs broke into the house with automatic weapons and kidnapped the boy and sent him back to the hell-hole in Cuba.
You must be some kind of fool to make the argument you did with this screen name.
Elian would prefer that Americans live as slaves to a centralized government. Have you noticed that EVERY major mass killing with guns has occurred under a Democrat administration that was intent on banning guns (and the constitution)? Elian and his ilk are no different than the Germans that helped Hitler carry out his final solution.
They could appoint one who wasn't a Commie.
But you crypto-Marxists won't allow that.
You're right to not carry isn't affected at all by armed citizens. But their right to own firearms IS by your point of view. So YOU ARE WRONG. You have "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" whether law abiding citizens have single shot guns or 30 round magazines. It's the criminal class that would restrict that. By the way, you are quoting the Declaration of Independence. This argument is about the Constitution. Try to get your sources straightened out.
I'm going to name a tyrant here: Edmond Kemper. Edmond Kemper was a serial killer who lived in N CA in the 1970s, having been released from prison after spending many years there for murdering his grandparents when he was 15. He drove the roads of N CA picking up young girls, murdering them, chopping them up, and on and on – you fill in the blanks. They found a young girl's hand on the road above my house. I was 16 and my dad had died 3 yrs before. My mother went out and bought a gun, installed flood lights, put sticks in every window, and took the screens off of the front windows so she could shoot out into the yard and not ruin the screens. We had 6 locks on every door. I have lived my life out with fear. BTW, there were 2 other serial killers up there the same year and between the 3 of them they killed about 30-35 people. Men, women, children – including the couple across the road from our home. These people terrorize our lives. The police cannot protect us from them. There are nasty, horrible people out there and we have to do the best we can to protect ourselves and our families. The way you think, you probably believe my mother was stupid for getting a shotgun and setting herself up to protect her family. The way I think, she was my hero. You would take her gun away from her because some guy on the other end of the country, someone who was a nutcase, shot everyone up after stealing a gun. Have some common sense.
More sales to law-abiding gun owners? Fine by me. If you think the NRA supports the sale of weapons to criminals, you need to turn off MSNBC.
Elian. My initial question is why are you incapable of debating a serious issue without childish name calling? Are you more likely to accept my arguments if I call you poo-poo head?
On to substantive issues. (I know, calling names is more fun but we really should talk about this.)
First. Tyrants often consult with others in their government, especially those they know will agree with them. Stalin was a master at this. That's Josef Stalin. Heard of him? He used to run the Soviet Union. Responsible for the deaths of between 20 and 30 million of his countrymen, all with the approval of the Soviet government.)
Second, your "right" to pursue "life, liberty and happiness" is not a Constitutional right. It is a statement made in the Declaration of Independence. It is a wonderful principal, of course, but the "right" of which you speak does not supersede a right specifically stated in the Constitution. And, if you think logically, the Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms in no way impinges on your "fundamental right." If someone misuses the arms he or she Constitutionally keeps and bears, for example by shooting you illegally, that ACTION is not protected. But, while someone else's simple ownership and carrying of a gun might make you "unhappy," you have no right to be free from such unhappiness at the expense of the other person's Constitutional right. Furthermore, have you ever considered that the other person's exercise of his or her right to the "pursuit of happiness" may include exercising his or her Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms?
As for your questions regarding battles that others may have engaged in, and what "frontline" (isn't that a PBS show?) someone may be on, those questions are completely irrelevant and, as explained above, a person's exercise of their Second Amendment rights in no way requires your "rights" (whatever you perceive them to be and whatever their putative source) to be second-class to those rights of the other person.
Finally, by way of explanation, I am not an NRA member, I am not a gun owner, and I have never held or fired a gun. But I do know, understand, and respect the Constitution and the rights embedded therein, and thus felt compelled to provide you with a brief education so that you can better understand that while YOUR rights are important, they are not superior to those of others who think differently than you.
Doody brain!
Oh for God's sake Elian. Law-abiding people having guns isn't the issue. Stop conflating the ownership of guns by law abiding people and that of criminals. Viewing all people who own weapons as the same is simply childish. Do you view everyone who owns cars in the same way? People who use cars in a legal fashion and those who kill people drunk driving?
Elian, you say ' I want to know: where is my right to pursue life, liberty and happiness? Hmm? I seem to have to give up my fundamental right so that you can have a gun. Precisely what battle have you engaged in, hmm? What frontline are you on that requires my rights to be second-class to yours.'
I might be able to answer this. I live in a high-crime area in Tulsa, OK. Last year a crazed meth head burst into the front door of a home where a pregnant woman was watching Sesame Street with her 3 yr. old boy, whereupon the man proceeded to stab the boy multiple times until he died, while the mother attempted to beat him off with her bare hands. Surely, you would be willing to give up a little of your precious happiness so that she and others could have a gun to shoot him dead?
Shortly thereafter, a young couple from Oral Roberts University were taking a stroll in the early evening at a local park, when two men robbed them, and then shot them to death execution style.
Just wondering how you think either of these victims should have defended themselves, and therefore provide you with more happiness? Of course, the second two I described were Christians, obviously, so I'm sure you aren't too concerned that there are two fewer of those on the earth.
Funny name play on "Elian Gonzalez". Hey, though, I find it almost pathetically laughable that you're so ignorant as to fail to see that only criminals are the ones who infringe upon your right to "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness", and that is why we call them criminals and we aim to punish them via our judicial system. Our Bill of Rights protect those notions, but I guess you'd have to stand away from your own mirror for more than three seconds to grasp such an in-depth, amazing concept. We won't hold our collective breaths waiting for you to do so either, but best of luck!
Elian…you should try to explain how my gun ownership in any ways takes away a right from you? I'll listen if you can give a rational answer.
Also, I'd like to know how your spouse/significant other/children reacted when you told them you wouldn't protect them.
@geng the Tiahrt Amendment is supported not just by the NRA but by a large number of US law enforcement agencies,. AND the BIPARTISAN Congressional research Service (CRS) supports the positions of Tiahart.
And a curse on you using dead bodies to politicise your wants. By the way, what was your reaction for the 14 kids killed at a mexican birthday party with guns from the Fast and Furious program? Were you making noises then about your rights and cursing the NRA members?
After watching the ATF in action with the 'Fast N Furious' debacle and after hearing they just botched another sting operation you're damn right the ATF director needs congressional oversight (!) Fast N Furious? Waco? Their involvement with the Ruby Ridge manslaughter? These knuckleheads are loose cannons and someone needs to be accountable to the public and congress. God knows Eric Holder isn't, hiding under the cloak of executive privilege.
Then explain to me why the NRA is feared in Washington but both Democrats and Republicans.
And Obama……….
Dumb argument, Elian Gonzales. You'd have to first rid the U.S. of all 300 million weapons, in order to see what kind of tyrants would arise when the U.S. population is disarmed.
Or, you could just look at twentieth century history just about anywhere in the world — Africa, South America, Europe, Asia — to see what happens to people when they cannot defend themselves.
Your argument is like asking a healthy person to demonstrate why they need an immune system. Doh!
Weapons are power. The people must retain as much power as possible. The power gap between government and people must be as small as possible. That is the point of the 2nd amendment. Anyone who reads history and does not see the need for this must have their head in the sand.
TO geng6010, apparently you either intentionally omit that several of the Democrat-liberal-leftist-progressive types in Congress also support the NRA and the First Amendment.
I don't think they're doing anything noble, but the typical CYA-ing necessary to get re-elected.
By the way, I'm an NRA member; you aren't. And you have the hubris to pretend to tell anyone about anything related to NRA or how our membership dues might be used? For what it's worth, the Second Amendment protects you, though I'm spitballing here by thinking you don't know that or have dismissed that.
Forgot to say: I'm a professional, veteran and law-abiding citizen. And I do respect the Constitution, especially the First and Second Amendments.
piers morgan has been saying on his show that politicians should stop listening to the people who voted for them & do whatever they want. thats what scares people.
also, you know every nation that got taken over by a dictator(that didnt want to be) thought it couldnt happen to them, that times were different, the world had changed….
its best to prepare for the worst unimaginable situation & hope it never happens. its not smart to risk freedom in the last place it exists on earth just because it doesnt seem like it could happen.
either way America is built on personal freedoms so everyone should be able to do whatever they want unless its harming others.
"I hope you understand that your money to the NRA is spent not to protect your rights but to protect the sales of more weapons."
Can we use that same fallacious statement w/ Planned Parenthood? This is about all of the time I spend with drones. A drone head is best served at the end of a swinging bat.
The Tiahart law was necessary because the CDC was doing bogus research and promoting junk science to undermine and excoriate gun owners. As long as there is such a prevailing anti-gun sentiment there all research relating to guns should be done by private researchers, no governmental tax dollars.
I wonder why it was even tolerated when the anti-gun propaganda was so obvious?
Again, I support the NRA. I don't care they are getting money from the gun manufactures and I hope they get more. I buy from gun manufactures. I guess it's my money working double time for me.
Gun rights brothers and sisters. NRA has posted a list of business' that do not support the 2nd amendment and the companies give money to the evil anti gun lobbyist. Make them feel it through affecting there bottom line. There checkbook.
Because NRA and NRA backed republicans has opposed any director appointment since 2006 since the retarded NRA backed law has taken effect, the job is being assigned to acting directors who also happen to have other full time jobs. i.e. US Attorney for Minnesota. You also did not comment on Tiahrt Amendment proposed by NRA backed Republican and strongly supported by NRA and opposed by every major metropolitan law enforcement agency as well as Mayors against Guns. It's a fact that NRA is obstructing enforcement of current laws. Your ignorant contribution to the NRA is helping propergate the gun violence in this country by allowing NRA to obstruct law enforcement agencies from taking guns away from criminals. Regardless of what you may think of NRA, that is a fact. NRA needs to stop pretending that the current laws are enforcable, because it's not precisely because of NRA, and the Left needs to stop using emotion as the only promoter for their cause. Look at the data. Use gun statistics rather than national tragedies. Talk about gun violence by adressing violence and stay away from gun nut who already distrust the government and will only fight back harder at the slightest hint of anyone trying to control their guns. Both sides needs to have their hypocracy and untruthfulness pointed out and dealt with if this debate is going to address any actual issue.
Second Amendment should be protected. But i am not okay with every single citizen carrying a gun in whatever manner for whatever purpose. I am not okay with irresponsible teenagers drunk driving, terrorists with bombs on a plane or violent natured/mentally deranged people carrying guns in a public place. I also have an issue with NRA obstructing the enforcement of current laws and then insisting that the government enforce its current laws. It's like I tied your hands, slapped you in the face, and then telling you that you should have had your hands free.
Elian, I'd point out that before the bodies of the innocents were even cold (and I mean that with heartfelt sympathy toward family and friends affected) the opportunist gun control advocates were taking every practical moment in front of the camera lens to broadcast their agenda and to not let the crisis go to waste. It was the most shameful thing imaginable. So, when you say that even a stack of dead bodies gives pause (to the NRA), think back to the parade of fools who were so quick to make their pronouncements about the event and what was most important to them. Of the 500+ deaths in Chicago alone last year, where was the outcry? Coming from a partial birth abortion supporting president, let's not fool ourselves about whether the president really cares about saving innocent lives – clearly he cares not.
Articles that support some of your points:
After the UK's gun ban in 1997:
2009: "UK is violent crime capital of Europe"
"The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital of Europe and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world, worse even than America, according to new research."
Also 2009: "The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S."
2002: A report by Reason magazine in the U.S.:
"Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent."
i agree with less is more. too many rules that create more gray area than a comparable overhaul would be the main reason this isn't being fixed. it is probably like inheriting our worst school system in the usa and making it the best in one presidential term.
I'm Cuban American and I have been directly affected by a tyrant. One that banned private ownership of guns. What other questions do you have?
}}} because real tyrants don't ask Congress to do X and Y about any given issue.
No, the issue executive orders which are vastly outside the principle purpose of Executive orders. They instruct the EPA to implement defacto "Cap and Trade" despite the fact that the idiotic C&T boondoggle could not possibly get past Congress. A tyrant ignores the instructions of the courts AND the laws when it comes to illegal immigrants on the public dole.
I could go on, but you're an idiot who doesn't care about FACTS in any way.
Because the FACT is, any sheep who thinks that defanging and declawing the SHEEPDOGS is going to do ANYTHING positive with regards to the wolves and their evil intentions is an idiot. The wolves can always find ways to do evil. The only protection against wolves and their evil is a lot more sheepdogs, armed with tooth and claw, to protect the sheep.
Or perhaps they passed that initiative since the ATF and Obama supplied mexican drug cartels with true Assault Rifles, not what citizens of the United States buy on a normal basis. We buy semi-auto's that fire one bullet per pull of the trigger Eric holder Gave the mexican cartels fully automatic military weapons, far more expensive than any gun we see.I don't think the ATF should even exsist after helping bury 60,000+ people they should all be charged with war crimes.
Todd Edwards by your statement about your opposition with video games
I take it you are a gamer. I think the realism and the violence in video games now is one factor that is warping the minds of our young people.
If we ban Violent video games it will not cause any deaths,as with banning guns would or could cause deaths.
You're one to talk about "dog whistles" — what about the "assault weapon" dog whistle? The term causes your emotions to go marching for the cause, and you can't possibly know what it means, because Diane Feinstein redefines it to mean anything at all.
In spite of the hooplah about "military style weapons", rifles of all kinds are responsible for about 2-3% of gun murders in America – and the scary-looking AR-15s are responsible for even fewer. So why all the noise? Because it's a reliable dog whistle; it brings out the ignorant who don't know anything and don't care to know anything.
Gee, I pay $35 a year for my NRA membership, and usually a $25 annual donation. I get a worth while to read magazine monthly. When reading t news online I hear of law suits that the NRA wins regularly. When our rights are being attacked I see the NRA honchos on the teley. When I go to shoot at my clubs, I know I'm insured by NRA. When I take gun safety training, the instructors are NRA trained. At my last defensive pistol match, 3 glocks were checked out to new teenage shooters, found out they were purchased with NRA no hassle to get grant $$. My daughter learned to be safe around guns thru the Eddie Eagle program. I'm sure they do more than what I know of. Best investment I can come up with.
It shows that you have never read the Tiahrt Amendment which prohibits release of gun trace information EXCEPT for the purpose of a Law Enforcement Investigation.
As far as blocking the appointment of BATFE directors, when someone who doesn't have an established background as an active gun grabber is nominated he or she will probably be confirmed. The acting Directors of an out of control agency we have had have done enough damage already.
Viet vet here. Also a NRA member. We need to keep fighting these
attacks on our rights as law abiding citizens to arm ourselves. Blood has not been shed on foreign soil by vets for us not to have this right which these idiots do not understand without the second, we will not have the others. I am also a chl carrier.
Oh yeah, like the people in Katrina after math that got all their guns taken at "gun point" but the Police, and then would not give them back! Until someone call the NRA and they were there the next day, filed an injunction with a federal judge to get the gun owners their guns back. Then the NRA had to file a contempt against the gun grabber to finally get the guns released back to the owner. Some of which never did get their guns back because the mysteriously disappeared. Ya think maybe the Police stole them!
We need the NRA to protect our second amendment rights! If politician, who, when taking office, swear to protected the constitution would do what the swore to do, maybe we wouldn't need the NRA. But unfortunately politician do what the want for their own political agenda, not what they swore to do and protect.
Gun and Ammo manufactures don't need private sales to stay in business, Governments will gladly buy all they can produce. Like the 1.6 billion rounds of ammo Homeland Security is purchasing. Wonder what they are going to do with that?? And the armored vehicles they are buying??
NRA Winning the Influence Battle Over Gun Control
OK, OK, just relax guys………………you can have all the guns you can carry.
We've decided to take away your ammo instead.
Go nuts. I reload, so I can make more.
fredlinn I am glad that you decided to take away my ammo instead. /sarcasm/
Guns are not the problem. Not enforcing current laws and letting criminals walk free is the problem. Look at the Australian government statistics: in the five years following a gun ban in Australia the number of ARMED ROBBERIES TRIPLED. Even 10 years later it was 50 percent higher than before the ban! Keep your stupid gun bans in your local municipalities and "enjoy" their benefits but do not come to our neighborhood where law abiding citizens are armed and tell us to give up our Second Amendment rights.
OK, and we won't take away your right to vote. We'll just take away your ballots.
And just who is 'we'?
Well everyone, the debate is over. fredlinn has decided. He has been place in charge of confiscating your ammunition. Hey, fredlinn, are there any of our other rights that you have been given authority over. I bow to your importance.
Hey Fred Linn why don't you be the first volunteer to go door to door and confiscate our ammo?
This is not a game. The NRA is not winning anything. The NRA is simply standing watch guarding our already long established right to protect ourselves. I might add that its not just to protect ourselves but to protect others as well. I, like most legal gun owners see it as a duty to protect those who do not have the ability or strength to defend themselves. We are not the bad guys, we are the first line of defense when bad people do bad things. Without us you wait for the police officers to show up, late and without many options left but to clean up the mess that has just gone down. People who choose to carry legally are not there to assert their power over you they are carrying to protect you and themselves if need be. Remember this when you make the decision to disarm them. P.S. I am a liberal and a gun carrier and am feeling a little betrayed right now.
I agree.
shall not be infringed… You can't single out the press for a tax. Any attempt to tax ammunition will meet the same fate.
All of this hyped up gun rhetoric is not about public safety. These people could spend weeks proposing non gun related ways to reduce pain, death and destruction. If they restricted all motorized vehicles to 30 MPH would that not save lives? After all it's just a little bit of time lost; no one can argue that it would not eliminate some pain, death and destruction. The point is there are a lot of things, non-constitutionally protected that could be discussed if public safety was the real concern. The fact that a constitutionally protected right
that falls so far down the list of a public safety threat gets pushed as priority one should give rise for concern!
facts win debates
That's because the NRA's stance is the better one in this situation. Punishing millions of Americans for the actions of a few nuts is just wrong.
It is the Progressive way. Is the ever-expanding TSA (soon to be in railway stations, bus stations, and sporting events near you) actually 'protecting' us from terrorism? Will Obamacare bring cheaper, better, and more personalized health care to our society ($20,000 for a family of 5, according to the IRS, which is now also in every part of your life).
This debate is simply about MORE control. Whether its abouts guns, or sodas, or oil- the Left know only about restriction, not freedom.
Guns, God, and a whole lot of hate for the president. It's amazing how conservative's are against anything President Obama is for. I don't think Obama is perfect by any means but he is our leader and we should stand united as a nation- not divided and resort to petty attacks. We are a democracy and we voted for him whether you like that or not. If I see one more Facebook post about how he's taking our guns, I'm gonna flip. God forbid we do background checks on everyone who tries to buy a gun and limit assault weapons.
It's amazing how liberals were against everything that George W. Bush was for. Why do you insist on calling me black, pot?
"Shall not be infringed"
Our founders made it impossible to negotiate this right for a reason. I own numerous assault rifles and loads of ammunition. It's my right. It's your right to whine like a B*tch.
We are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. We are not against Obama, we are acting in defense of the Constitution.
The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are verty clear and need to be respected. They are not being respected by this administration or by the majority of Democrats.
Calling look-alike military rifles 'assault weapons' does not make them so, no matter how much you stamp your feet. Quit being purposely or ignorantly deceptive.
Funny, did you say the same thing when George Bush was president? And your choice of words is interesting, "assault weapons" Hey Einstein ALL weapons are "assault weapons" knives, hammers, tree limbs, rocks. The simple fact that you're calling these weapons assault weapons signifies you haven't done any homework; You're blindly following the left-hand narrative. You also have a profound problem with anyone disagreeing with your president; So that's okay ONLY when there's a Republican in the white house??? Like it or don't the 2nd amendment was crafted so average citizens can protect themselves from a "tyrannical" government, a position which this administration is treading dangerously close.
Tell that to Obama…who is the MOST DIVISIVE President of any. He is the one who demonizes anyone who doesn't agree with his agenda. And yes, I do believe Obama would take away our guns if he could get away with it. How does putting my name on a piece of paper make you safer? There are NO assault weapons that citizens can buy and haven't been since 1938. What you guys call "assault" weapons are guns that you don't like the look of. They all function the same….one pull, one shot!
Wrong… we are not a Democracy! The United States in a Constitutional Republic!
WACB83, let me define something here, according to Webster's Online dictonary (and the one on my desk):
As*sault" (#), n. [OE. asaut, assaut, OF. assaut, asalt, F. assaut, LL. assaltus; L. ad + saltus a leaping, a springing, salire to leap. See Assail.]
1. A violent onset or attack with physical means, as blows, weapons, etc.; an onslaught; the rush or charge of an attacking force; onset; as, to make assault upon a man, a house, or a town.
2. A violent onset or attack with moral weapons, as words, arguments, appeals, and the like; as, to make an assault on the prerogatives of a prince, or on the constitution of a government.
3. (Law) An apparently violent attempt, or willful offer with force or violence, to do hurt to another; an attempt or offer to beat another, accompanied by a degree of violence, but without touching his person, as by lifting the fist, or a cane, in a threatening manner, or by striking at him, and missing him. If the blow aimed takes effect, it is a battery.
This is precisely the point that most people and the NRA are arguing (and the intention of the 2nd Amendment, by the way)! The purpose and intent of these weapons (beside the obvious sporting uses) is to prevent an assault on the American people by criminals, terrorists, and our own government (should it ever rise against we the people). Maybe we should call these "assault prevention weapons."
As a non American the part that baffles me is the hostility to the idea, not of the removal of firearms but to that of placing stricter controlls over their sale and handling, someone I know recently had their semi automatic rifle stolen from their car, they left the car unattended overnight in a parking area with the weapon inside, this rifle is now in the hands of criminals because of the stupidity of the owner. The idea that only criminals and the mentaly ill may carry some weight but often it is either the stupidity or greed of a previous owner that places those weapons in their grasp, making it a legal requirement for background checks before all sales/resales and also to ensure that weapons are properly secured is surely not much to expect.
Unfortunately background checks cannot detect stupidity! I'm not against the NICS check and living in NJ I not only have the NICS I have the NJ way of selling guns which is very stringent. Banning weapons and parts of weapons is not the answer. I fear the societal changes that have taken place over the last 2 decades have altered this country beyond recognition. It's a shame…
Please explain the logical connection between restrictions on legal sales and the theft of a weapon? How could the first possibly prevent the latter?
You can thank me for pointing out your logical error anytime. You're welcome!
Interesting article. The only thing I've noticed that is common amongst articles such as this is that it's always posited as the NRA vs gun control. What about me? I'm not the NRA, most gun owners and a lot of people fighting this aren't part of the NRA, yet their voice is overlooked, their presence, completely ignored.
How do you measure "influence"? I suspect you're missing the conversation among the grassroots. I was recently at a pro-gun town-hall meeting. I knew many of the prominent organizers via Facebook. The lead organizer asked, in the first minute or two, how many were there because of social media; at least half answered in the affirmative. If you were to ask the remaining attendees, the answer would probably be "my friend (who got it from social media) called me."
I can tell you, my friends on FB aren't looking to the NRA for marching orders. Many of us call the NRA the world's largest gun control organization. For example, the NRA came up with "armed guards" and "mental health" as two of their main themes. In my world, both are rejected. We want to repeal gun-free zones, allow teachers and administrators to train and arm themselves. We don't want the government using "mental health screening", for several reasons. One, everyone would be subject to such tests – and the government gets to define "illnesses" such as "Opppositional Defiant Disorder." Two, there are no reliable tests for "about to crack up and shoot up a bunch of kids." The NRA isn't even on the same page. Instead of following dead-tree and dead-airwave pundits, you might need to dig deeper; the old media is not where the conversation is happening. Many people have stopped their cable and print subscriptions already. They turn to the 'net for the news. When they pass around an article about the NRA, it may be tagged "look what this idiot is proposing", and might not be a ringing endorsement of some of the other idiots in the debate, such as Feinstein.
Perhaps there's a lesson in this for you. The NRA does amplify its members' voices.
Exactly. The NRA is highly effective. You can call it what you want, but it's grass roots. It's us. It's not a corporate lobby as Soros would have you believe. You don't have to agree with every single thing the NRA does, but the NRA "gets it done". You can join and add to that influence. You can also express your opinion as a member. I have talked to Wayne personally.
I totally agree D Toe ! A month ago I WAS a registered Democrat and non-member of the NRA. As you say, all the articles completely ignored my position on gun control. Now that I AM a member of the NRA and no longer a Democrat, just maybe my little voice will be heard !!
Okay so what do you want to say? People like you let the NRA do the heavy lifting while you sit on your behind and postulate the the "nra doesn't represent me." Non-gunner apologists like you who can't or won't make a decision make the rest of us sick.
Key points:
"Republicans are missing…" < applies to almost every issue
Chris Christie supports gun control… < preparing the way for his 2016 campaign as Democrat nominee for president. Stop calling him a Republican.
The First Amendment is there you see,
We can say when and what we please.
And the Second one is there,
To keep us all free.
Some want to take our rights away,
But it won't happen on this day.
They will continue to try in another way,
Freedom will be a gun shot away.
They wish to take our guns from us,
And they are trying to make a fuss.
This old vet say's no they can't,
I took an oath and went to Nam.
Many have died to keep us free,
I will too, if need be.
In seventy one I passed the test,
And served with Americas best.
Fingerprinted and photo,
For owning a gun.
I don't think so
You communist son.
MOLON LABE is the battle cry,
Gun from my hand you will have to pry.
The oath I took on another day,
Is still in force and you will pay!
A brave man I will never be,
Until you take my rights from me.
Liberal socialists I despise,
It's hard to wait for their demise !!!
John D USN RVN 71,72, 73, evac 75
Well said, sailor!
Thank goodness we have an organization like the NRA who doesn't waiver in supporting our God given constitutional rights. The 2nd amendment says nothing about hunting or muskets. If the 2nd goes, so do the rest of our rights. Rock on NRA!
First the NRA apeals to logic while the gun controllers use emotion: notice the idea that gun control must be enacted while a tragedy is fresh.
Second the US Constitution favors the NRA.
Third the NRA understands that eternal vigilance is the cost of liberty.
The main media and liberal alternative media have begun the war on how we equate gun rights to people being murdered and blood on our hands. They are working on people giving up their Freedoms of guns. It is very overt now. CBS Sunday morning had the "Let's give up the Constitution segment" We do need to stand together with the NRA. I firmly believe by us standing as ONE in MASS and joining the NRA by the millions D.C. will get the message loud and clear! We will not give up any more of our Freedoms now!
NRA membership: $25 – Freedom and Showing D.C. what they can do with themselves: Priceless!
76% of all gun violence is gang related. That means that at the very very least, 3 out of 4 of all gun violence is carried out by Democrats. Yes, I think it would be good for you Democrats to disarm yourselves before your next drive by or like James Holmes the next time you go to the movies(he had all the pro Obama stuff on his facebook before it got scrubbed).
It isn't Conservative or Republicans shooting at innocent people, we don't have a gun problem, we have a Democrat problem. Facts are facts.
You make an excellent point. All these mass shooters were leftist liberals,(or were raised by them) all were hopped up on pharma dope, and all took place(except Giffords in Arizona) in gun free zones.
Yes, take out the emotions and go with the facts, anything less is dancing on the graves of these poor children which it seems Democrats feel no remorse in doing.
When you go to the doctor and he or she tells you that you have high cholesterol, they don't tell you that you must stop eating all together. No, they tell you to cut out the fatty foods, same thing here.
These shooters are not law abiding conservative gun owners, no they are Democrats who are drugged out and or a product of Democrat great society ideology. Democrats for the most part don't value life, just take an honest look at every Democrat ruled district.
A gun in the hands of a Republican Conservative saves lives, why Democrats want to take away what saves lives and no address the real killers, well an honest objective look at the party and it all makes sense.
Perhaps the difference is and will be: Facing reality, proposing real solutions that will work, and telling the truth. The left and the anti-gunners are incapable of any of those, so pro-gunners and NRA win.
There is no gun control "debate". There are only our rights and those who would strip us of them. It' an attack on the soul of America.
It is very simple. It is more about resisting continued infringements upon our Constitutional rights than it is about guns.
Guns have already been 'reasonably' regulated since 1934. The anti-gun nuts use deceptive language and inflamed emotion along with the twisting of statistics to make their case- which is also deceptive. Their case is ultimate gun confiscation through incrementalism. It is a road map laid out by history.
The Democrat's current witch hunt supported by the mainstream press has focused upon the crisis of 'gun violence', an all inclusive term designed to create fear and disgust in the American people. Never is it spoken about the millions of episodes where a gun is successfully used in the defense of a person, their property, or their families.
Assault weapons have been banned since 1934. The current AR-15 style rifle only 'looks' like its military cousin and it operates much differently.
Common sense Americans realize the problem is with a society dependant on treating its problems with pharmaceuticals, not with the tools misused by unstable individuals. And those tools are integral to protecting the Constitution by the people from a tyrannical government as they were designed to do by the Founding Fathers.
It should make honest people pause when those elected by us should begin to fear us to the point of disarming us.
Bruce Rogers,
You like the Gun Control movement are willfully ignoring the most basic facts of this argument and they are as follows. 1)Our Constitution does in fact affirm and guarantee each and every American citizen the right to keep (possess) and Bear (Carry on their person) Arms. That Right, unlike the way you framed it in your article, is NOT objective and it is NOT open to discussion or negotiation. Citizens that have read what the framers of the Constitution wrote about the second amendment understand full well that they intended us specifically to be able to Overthrow a Tyranical Government with that right. Meaning, they didn't want us to have the capacity to shoot a bird or a rabbit and take it home for dinner, they wanted us to have the ability to defeat a standing army on US soil, particularly one that was turned against us by our own government. Those facts are not objective and those rights are still NOT negotiable. They are granted to us by our creator (they are a birthright, God given) they are inalienable (No man, president, Legislator or Hollywood Actor can take them from us) and as a barely important side note for any literate man or woman, the United States Supreme Court has affirmed exactly what I just wrote. SO! Understand clearly that ANY attempt to infringe upon my Constitutional rights will be considered by me and most gun owners to be an act of Treason. It sounds like a overreaction and an antiquated term to the gun control proponents but to Americans that understand their obligation to future generations to maintain the freedoms that we have, it's something we are willing to fight for. To gun owners, gun control advocates are irresponsibly plunging us rapidly toward a scenario where armed civil conflict would be a duty, an obligation to oneself and future generations. I really don't think gun control advocates understand that. I've joined the NRA this year for the first time since I was a kid and I've wired them money to fight for me. I'm deadly serious about this issue. My family has fought in every major military conflict this country has participated in dating from the Gulf War to the Revolutionary War. Both of my Grandfathers and my father were Army Airborne, Both of my grandfathers and both of my Great Uncles fought in WWII. My great Grandfather fought in WWI and the Spanish American war. They didn't fight so that I would foolishly grant some "Progressive" the ability to deny me and my descendants the right to defend ourselves from Tyranny. We're deadly serious, you need to understand that. We're also on the right side of this issue, gun control advocates are the tyrants and would certainly rule like tyrants if they succeed in disarming our citizens.
I'd like everyone to be clear on something when discussing rights. For instance the second amendment.
The constitution DOES NOT create that right. That right is created when you are born.
We believe everyone has certain inalienable rights as human beings. One of which is the right to self defense. This right inherently implies that if someone is attempting to harm you, you defend yourself with whatever means necessary.
So what is the 2nd Amendment? The second amendment is an instruction to the United States Federal government that this particular right shall not be infringed. The Constitution does not create anything other than a structure for Federation with EXPLICIT instructions on how the United States Federal government is to conduct its governing.
One could, in fact one should see the Constitution as a granter of rights to the United States Federal government. As far as a means of self-defense is concerned, the Constitution of the United States via the 2nd amendment EXPLICITLY charges the United States Federal government with the duty to ensure that the people's natural right to self defense SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
There is no interpretation, no granted right to anyone including the United States Federal government included in the 2nd Amendment. The second amendment is a command, an instruction if you will, to the United States Federal government. This command is duty bound to all who swear an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution.
DO NOT ALLOW the means of self-defense of the individual to be infringed.
It's high time people on both sides of ANY issue educate themselves on what RIGHTS are. Especially the people who think that my rights violate their rights. That is contradiction of logic, and a completely invalid argument.
quick correction. where I said, "…no granted right to anyone including the United States Federal government…"
should read, "…no granted right to any one individual including those individuals representing the United States Federal government…"
Some one who knows what works and what doesn't. http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/02/sen-ted-cruz-schools-congress-on-gun-control-facts-2570890.html
This pro-NRA article from Forbes is to be expected since they accept a lot of advertising from the weapons industry, i.e. Beretta Firearms. These days, the weapons industry is experiencing a lot of growth due to fear, suspicion, myth, superstition, and anger, so how can Forbes pass up those advertising dollars?
True, money talks. And the 'silent majority' in America has spoken by buying NRA memberships and more guns, ammo, etc.
So you define this debate as a problem for Forbes to retain its advertising dollars?
Did you read any of the comments, and if so, is that all you got from this?
Yes, in the land of Microsoft fonts being around in 1973, Obama never said on Univision that every American who doesn't agree with his far left ideology is the enemy and must be punished.
Those people who live in the real world and take the President at his word are….oh yes racists, right?
It is not about him, it is about why he said it. He knows that Democrats are filled with hate and lies and that such hate would appeal to his base as this is how they think.
76% of all gun violence is gang related, as we know white, black, brown, everyone in a gang is a Democrat. So we have a Democrat problem not a gun problem in America.
The NRA and GOA are real grass-roots supported organizations, while the anti-gun groups are all mostly 'astro-turf' supported. They have to contact school principals who then tell the selected children to write letters pleading the President to 'ban guns' and 'make us safe'. These tactics are 'astro-turf', and these kids are not old enough to understand the debate. Its all fluff, the most basic emotional appeals when the real arguments cannot be won.
PS – You want an emotional appeal from the pro-gun side? "I'll keep my freedom, money and guns…You keep the change!"
I would ask those politicians who state that the American people need to be disarmed of their military style rifles : why would you believe that the police are any more capable of being responsible with these weapons after having only a score of hours in training with them- as you intend to exempt law enforcement from the ban- than the millions of veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan using these weapons for thousands of hours under hostile conditions? I would much more trust my life to the judgement of a man who walked in a dangerous place for years and who learned when not to fire, exhibiting extraordinary restraint in the face of a hostile people.
Who is more qualified?
Well said sir!
This pro-NRA article is to be expected since Forbes accepts a lot of advertising from the weapons industry like Beretta Firearms. In times like these, they and others are experiencing tremendous growth because of fear, suspicion, anger, myth, and superstition, so how can Forbes pass on all those advertising dollars. I was 30-year NRA life member until it become obvious that the self-claimed crazy man, Wayne LaPierre and others decided the solution to the disease of gun violence was more guns in our society. Now he screams that armed guards in our schools and elsewhere is the solution. How about about armed guards at supermarkets, movie theaters, etc. to check your identity papers to ensure you have a right to be on the premises?
Most people get wiser the older they get, apparently you are just a left wing tool spewing your hate. Your comments are more appreciated on Huffingand puffing sites
The armed guards in schools idea is gaining traction even with Democrats. Its a good idea, because school shootings are not going to magically go away. Outside of schools, where everyday people walk and gather, that falls to Concealed Carry people, who can act before the police get there, to prevent one-sided massacres.
You're not the brightest bulb, are you? Sandy Hook has shown who they thought is right in this argument by placing two armed guards in each of their schools. Would-be psycho mass-killer wannabees will now choose a different target for their planned mayhem.
All of these slimy Democrats trying to remove arms from law-abiding Americans all have protection for themselves and protection in the schools where their children attend. They know they can be as hypocritical as they want because they can count on morons like you to carry their water for them.
Interestingly enough, those crazy people in the Newtown School district agree with the NRA about armed guards. And so did the president. And quite frankly so do most of the sane people around me including several teachers who are very anti-gun.
Who is winning the gun control debate? The NRA? No, this debate is actually between an over reaching anti-Constitutional government and the 2nd Amendment rights of the people. The gun sales clearly dictate who is winning. The people are winning against tyrants who look to take away their rights. They are not all NRA members.
How is your right to life, liberty, and happiness hurt by my right to own a gun?
The 2nd Amendment protects all of our rights. It is the ultimate check on government tyranny.
We have heard much about Sandy Hook, where 26 innocents were murdered by by a deranged gunman. We have heard nothing about five million innocent dead Kulaks murdered by a Marxist psychopath, Vladimir Ilich Lenin. We have heard nothing about about tens of millions of innocent Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, all murdered by Marxist psychopaths, none of the victims who were allowed the means to protect themselves. The chances of being shot or strangled by a psychopath in the United States is miniscule, but it is a way of life and death in Marxist dictatorships.
Barack Hussein Soetero Obama, or whatever his name is, has actively flirted with Marxist professors and politicians, is violating the law (Government Motors, Fast and Furious) just as a Marxist psychopath would do, and has many key characteristics of a psychopath — narcissism, dishonesty, parasitic lifestyle, failure to accept responsibility for his own actions.
Not one person in a hundred on this site can give a reasoned explanation of why and how a clinical psychopath acts as he does. Before surrendering your means of defense, you might want to learn what psychopathy is and what it is we are up against. You might gain a greater appreciation for the wisdom of the classical liberals (not faux Liberals) that wrote the Constitution of the United States of America. The Constitution that Obama says needs to be re-written.
I guess I would label myself a moderate 2nd amendment rights supporter and I think the author is exactly right. When you think of the passion of gun control advocates, they seem to rise and fall with news stories, but the NRA has been fighting this battle for years.
I do wish we could find common ground. It seems like licensing cars and drivers is a good idea because of the potential danger that cars pose. I know that is a slippery slope to Pro 2nd rights advocates, but isn't there a way to ensure that people who purchase guns know how to use them and are sane enough to use them for sport and/or personal defense? I don't own a gun (my wife won't let me-smart woman), but in today's society that leaves me with the only protection being that I call police AFTER I've been robbed or my wife has been raped, or maybe not calling at all because we've both been killed.
No, there is no way for the government to "ensure that people who purchase guns know how to use them and are sane enough." First off, those who can't legally buy can steal or obtain them otherwise. Please tell us about the great success of the War on Politically Incorrect Substances, before you propose a new War on Politically Incorrect Weapons — it will be a long wait, so I won't hold my breath.
There is no magic test which can determine intent or likelihood to go bonkers and shoot bunches of people. The proper and efficient response to a mass murderer is another armed person on the scene. Laws which reduce the number of such "first responders" decrease safety – and chief among those impediments are fake "gun free zones" which are actually "defense-free zones" in the Real World.
READ WHAT THE COMMUNIST PARTY SAY ABOUT OBAMA AND FRANK MARTIAL DAVIS IN 2008….. " in Hawaii was an African-American poet and journalist by the name of Frank Marshall Davis, who was certainly in the orbit of the CP – if not a member – and who was born in Kansas and spent a good deal of his adult life in Chicago, before decamping to Honolulu in 1948 at the suggestion of his good friend Paul Robeson. Eventually, he befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu from Kansas and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who retracing the steps of Davis eventually decamped to Chicago. In his best selling memoir 'Dreams of my Father', the author speaks warmly of an older black poet, he identifies simply as " Frank" as being a decisive influence in helping him to find his present identity as an African-American, a people who have been the least anticommunist and the most left-leaning of any constituency in this nation – though you would never know it from reading so-called left journals of opinion. At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack's memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis' equally affecting memoir, "Living the Blues" and when that day comes, I'm sure a future student will not only examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that US imperialism created in order to subdue Communist parties but will also be moved to come to this historic and wonderful archive in order to gain insight on what has befallen this complex and intriguing planet on which we reside. /////// http://socialismtheoryandpractice.blogspot.com/2008/06/rethinking-history-and-future-of.html
Haven't owned a gun in 50 + years. Just joined NRA and purchased two weapons recently because of Obama and his policies.
Not to give them any advice, but the whack Left is just too fragmented in construct to stay on one thing for very long. Each constituency is constantly whining – hence the Dem focus on anything is ever changing, E.g., gun bans/ammo bans/magazine restrictions, gay rights, women in combat, equal pay doctrines (which aren't even in place in the White House), EPA regualtions, ObamaCare, abortion, religious freedoms (or lack thereof), etc.
Nothing the Left want to do will guaranty we will not have another incident similar to Sandy Hook.
Every murder, mass or individual, is in fact perpetrated by someone breaking the law….since criminals or those breaking the laws, are all law breakers, any and all laws are therefore going to be ignored…..laws only pertain to "Law Abiding Citizens"….take away the ability of the "Law Abiding Citizen" to defend themselves, family, business, etc, etc and we enter into lawlessness.
Good intentions are just that, good intentions….they do not solve the issue!
The NRA is winning the debate because those viewing the debate know the left is lying about their goals and intentions and basically understands that the left wants to use Semi-Automatic rifle ban as a "Camel's nose under the Tent" tactic.
This is especially apparent because it is quite clear that such guns account for only about 2-3% of Gun violence and NRA and Tea Party types are responsible for ZERO percentage of the gun violence going on.
Gun violence is almost totally a young Black male issue in the inner cities – mass murder incidents are totally related to certifiably nutso mental cases.
Responsible gun owners should not tolerate the Left's holy Jihad against the 2nd Amendment – their "Holy Grail" – to be allowed to disarm the law-abiding and responsible and leave the criminal and gang elements completely armed to continue the killing they have been engaged in.
I don't give a poop what the libtards think or do. The 2nd amendment is there for a really simple reason. My conceal carry permit is the 2nd amendment and I have been for a long time a life member of the NRA.
That being said, I am in favor of gun control ! Only for government employees though. Secret service on down to the ATF should be restricted to 5 shot 22′s only.
Nuff said.
We're winning because we are in the RIGHT and fighting FOR freedom while the Left fights to oppress and tyrannize.
Military discipline, yeah; lots of us were military, and we know the value of being armed.
Don't be ridiculous. Playing violent video games doesn't make you a killer. The ONLY correlation that stands up to scrutiny is drugs, since virtually every mass shooter for decades has turned out to be on some sort of mind-altering drug. These drugs even list as possible side effects suicidal tendencies and psychosis. Want less shootings? Stop overprescribing drugs in public schools and foster homes, and focus more on exercise and diet and not boring kids to death so much that they act up.
And, by the way, if we could magically confiscate the hundreds of millions of guns currently in circulation, nut jobs would just switch to explosives or poison gas or something else that kills more people than guns. If I were a nut job, it would take me all of about five minutes to figure out how to kill a bunch of people. So you actually want guns in circulation, since that gives everyone a better chance to defend themselves – assuming they haven't been disarmed by morons.
I am amazed the prez released a picture of him shooting a semiautomatic shotgun that the rest of us can't be trusted with. hmm
It is an over-and-under.
And by the look of him, he does not shoot very often.
It is worthwhile pointing out that the gun debate is being articulated and carried on not just in the rarefied atmosphere of big government and big lobbying. The debate is alive and well down at the grass-root main-street America level, too. The NRA side of the issue is not so much gaining ground as it is re-establishing the ground that it will always hold because that ground- the high ground of reasonable, constructive and informed discussion belongs to them and those literally hundred of millions of Americans- of all political stripes- who safely and legally own guns.
Anti gun=fascist pig. Simple as that.
I find it most interesting that Obammie the commie, even with the full force of all major media at his disposal has lost this so quickly. Real fear must be rippling through the powers that be that the giant has awakened. Oh, he may still be a bit drowsy but is comming full awake and quickly! What's a global "mother" to do? I am thinking they are having nightmares about angry giants shouting "Fee Fi Fo Fission, I smell the blood of elitist politicians"! I say we drag the guilty buggers in and give 'em a fair trial :)
It is not about winning the debate but common sense. Banning guns only effects the law abiding gun owners and not the criminals. "Assault" weapons don't even count for 2% of all gun deaths each years. All rifle deaths only account for 4-5% gun deaths. Magazine capacity and back ground checks are the only items which have even a remote chance and will not have any effect on the handgun violence in the urban centers where 65% or more of the annual gun deaths happen.
It is hard to win opinion of people who know you are lying. How does the gun control crowd expect to get people to follow what they say if they just make whatever wild claims they want. What is important is to move past the useless arguments and put the gun ban away. We need to focus on the causes of crime and the decay of society, not argue of what kind of gun they use to do it. Solutions will not be able to be found unless the gun owners are on board, and that won't happen if the gun control crowd is determined to demonize them.
The NRA and the millions it speaks for will not be silenced or disenfranchised from the political process. Our rights will not be infringed.
Amen Josh. But it's a shame we need an organization to protect the rights that are clearly given in our Constitution. Thank God for the NRA but shame on all the people out there who made the NRA necessary.
According to a report in the Daily Rash, two nights ago at a state dinner Joe Biden called the first lady's new hairstyle "ghetto chic". Is it just a coincidence that Obama had his picture taken firing a gun the next day? http://www.thedailyrash.com/joe-biden-calls-michelle-obamas-new-hairstyle-ghetto-chic
Not to worry.
Obama and Holder have more "active shooter" false-flag operations "under the radar."
They'll gin this thing up yet.
You know, the administration and the progressives are trying to shape this whole debate as the NRA vs America, then demonize them as the only entity involved here to marginalize the voices they represent. Yes, they are big, but certainly not the only group with a voice, or strongly concerned with what may happen. The GOA, SAF, and numerous others exist too, but the real influence is "the people" themselves whether they belong to any of these groups or not, they know they have merit. Americans that know history, the facts involved, and familiar with guns at all can read through the propaganda the WH is trying to sell. It's not about safer schools, it is about disarming the lawful public, one step at a time targeting anything of convenience by events and with emotionalism. Their game is to act fast, before people have time to think about it, to educate themselves, and why the progressives are in such a hurry. How can anybody compromise on their natural individual rights that were reaffirmed, not given, by the Constitution? Why is the right that defends all others somehow less meaningful, to be negotiated by a few politicians in power today? There is no "winning" involved, only something for the people and our future generations to "lose" through abuses of power and tyranny. Times and the calendar may have changed, but human nature and the addiction for power has not. The Founding Fathers knew that very well, had their eyes focused far into the future, and so should the rest of Americans on the fence, or wondering as to purpose in these times. Like many things, the tools needed to defend yourselves or resist tyranny are only needed when there is a need, and if that ability to do so gone, there is no going back… be that need tomorrow, fifty or a hundred years from now, it will be too late.
I really don't CARE whether the republicans take the lead or not on the issue. If they want to act like frightened sheep then let them. I care only about protecting the RIGHT of Americans to keep and bear arms as GUARANTEED IN THE CONSTITUTION. Those who oppose it are domestic enemies whether they know it or not. Without the 2nd Amendment, the 1st Amendment CANNOT be protected. So WAKE UP America. This is NOT about HUNTING, unless by hunting they mean open season on POLITICIANS who are trying to take away our constitutional rights!
You live in a secluded area, your home alone, 3 murderous rapists just broke into your house and they all have knives. So you grab your knife (your Smith and Wesson 357 mag was just confiscated yesterday)
How do you think that knife fight will go for you?
It's all connected to handing our country over to the UN/NWO (new world monarchy of "inetectual elites and world bqankers")and here's how their gun control is going:
Gun Control in the UK & Their Warning to the U.S.
Watch what happens when Guns are banned in Australia
Common sense in 5 minutes (what your government doesn't want you to hear):
BBC vs Anti-Gun Control Advocate John Lott
The History, Philosophy and Ethics of Gun Control
Body count of gun control in 8 minutes
Gun Control is Genocide – documentary by Mike Adams
Republicans standing on the sidelines is no surprise. That is the number one reason they continue to lose elections.
I'm so done with the cowards that make up the Republican Party! So are most of my lifelong Republican friends. They can't even support the Second Amendment. They cower, scared to death of Obama and the Communist Party. Time to leave these cowards in the dust.
Wayne LaPierre needs to be the next republican presidential candidate. We need conviction, energy and stamina.
We need a new political party.
I'd say they're winning. I'm one of the 250,000 to join in the past month.
This article misses the whole point. The media thinks that political influence only flows from pressure groups; and if groups with the same agenda don't work together then their message is ineffective. With gun control, that just isn't the case. INDIVIDUALS are the "pressure group" in this case. Sure, the NRA has a membership in the millions, but there are far more people who agree with them than media is willing to admit. And they all vote! There are far more people who side with the NRA and are not members than the Brady Campaign and every other "gun control" group combined will ever be able amass. On this issue, politicians aren't beholden to NRA as a lobbying group, like they are to the money that they get from other lobbyists (Sierra Club, big pharma, auto manufacturers, ad infinitum.) They are afraid of the ballot box. Most gun owners see gun control as an ataack on essential liberty; it is an assault on the very Constitution of the United States. What does the gun control side think "shall not be infringed" means?!!
I think this issue for Progressives and Liberals has been exposed for what it really is…hypocrisy. They manufacture outrage and concern for the safety and well being of "innocent children" as is relates to gun violence and yet they promote and fund on a massive scale the efforts of abortion rights activists. The average total number of gun deaths across ALL age groups PALES in comparison to the number of CHILDREN'S lives ended through abortion. Yes the NRA uses its MEMBERSHIP fees to promote the cause of its constituents. These funds are voluntarily given and anyone who disagrees with the agenda has the remedy of withdrawing that support. On the other hand the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USES TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO FUND ABORTION GROUPS, to the tune of nearly 1 billion dollars since 2002. The NRA and its membership are an easy target for Gun Control advocates until the veil of hypocrisy is removed. The facts reveal that ABORTION causes far more harm to innocent children than gun violence. The issue of gun violence is linked to many factors not just the implement used in these horrific crimes. Until the conversation moves on from the ideological to the factual, the will be nothing of consequence achieved.
This is a very good article and I believe you are right about this . Because practicaly speaking the people who have the guns also make the rules especially in every totalitarian country. And our founding fathers had it right we need a right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed to protect us from a tyrannical government that would want to oppress or murdur or imprison the people for their own selfish greedy and covetous ends. And this is still the main reason to have our personal right to keep and bear arms as well as hunting, target practice and even skeeting as this President says he does and does do. And we don't need only elitist politicians who act like the kings of England did and no common person could hunt or use guns. This elitist snobbery also needs to stop and come to an end also and those who act this way and live extravegently off of the rest of us while hiring armed guards to defend themselves while condemning our rights as citiens is nothing but the rankest hypocrisy. Sincerely ;
"You darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments; who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism, tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check.
"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, and supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth?
If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom – go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
"Courage, then, my countrymen, our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause, as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?"
"It does not take a majority to prevail….but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
"Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can."
"The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
Great1 Now I will have to stay up all night memorizing those amazing words………Thanks
The NRA have a position on this issue, but I think most people have already established their own opinion on gun control and the news of the day won't change it. The purpose of having guns in American society is to protect the People from their own government as expressed in the Constitution. If the government wants the law-abiding public to own fewer guns, then the best way to go about it is to make the public less afraid of the laws, regulations, restrictions and activities of the government. We can examine the details surrounding the issue of gun control until the cows come home, but the bottom line is that most Americans don't trust the government, don't trust the ability of law enforcement to keep them safe, don't trust criminals not to break in to their homes, and there is NO REASON they should.
And when the tide of regulation and laws overtake the responsible citizen then it will be the government whom he fears to break into his house and take him away.
The present government's mission to DESTROY the Constitution – after taking an oath to protect it – is why so many are waking up to the TYRANNY we are all facing.
The second amendment "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is our LINE IN THE SAND!!
OhBummer is a b00b and a fool for attacking the American Tea Partiers. Heck, he thought that he had all of us hoodwinked, hornswoggled, and bamboozled. He's annoyed that the Tea Partiers are not grateful to him for hijacking the American healthcare system — the greatest act of vandalism perpetrated upon the American people since a gang of jihadi frootloops and loonytoons hijacked some planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center towers — and the Pentagon, and made a failed attempt to crash into the White House — and instead drilled a hole in a Pennsylvania farm thanks to some very courageous American passengers.
And — now widely seen for what he is — the president presents a problem for the Democrat-captured media. They pump out his propaganda for him — and, like the opinion monitors in Ayn Rand's novel, "Atlas Shrugged" — they are dodging brickbats and rotten vegetables.
He's pompous, pampered, and pretentious — a pseudo-intellectual fop. He's a glorified, smooth-lyin' dandy, and slicker than Sick Willie Clinton. He's a dictator-on-the-make, a bloodsxcking, predatory humanitarian thug, and a low-down skunk.
He's a fraud and a swindler. He lies when he inhales and he lies when he exhales; his oxygen is the falsification of reality. He lies, placidly and laconically, as if deception were a soporific drug. But lies, after all, are the heart and soul and the sword and shield of the Democrat party.
He's a friend of the poor and the downtrodden — indeed, you can hear the milk of human kindness sloshing around inside of him when he walks.
He declares himself the post-racial leader — "Let me be clear!" he intones — and he hides behind his race, daring his critics to put their reputation for fairness at risk.
He pauses to ponder the portent of his propaganda — and it is fakery; he smiles and his mendacity comes shining through. Shake hands with Barak Hushpuppy OhBummer — "The Mistake of '08" — the illegal alien squatter in the White House until his "papers" have been lab-tested for age and chemicals, etc — the community organizer of the OhBummer Wrecking Crew, the more-fascist-than-socialist Fleabagger-in-Chief, the closet Muslim with the mix-and-match morality, the King of The Republic of Lies — and America's first and last Arab president. Now count your fingers.
No better post has ever been penned!
Good. Because the typical response of taking away guns and mags from people who didn't do anything is idiotic.
I think the Vast majority of americans believe in the 2nd amendment.I would like to say about 75% are pro 2nd amendment,that may be high though.We went to a town hall meeting the other night with Jim Bridenstine.the question was asked will you protect 2nd amendment rights.He said yes and there was loud applause in the room with a few boos so faint you could hardly hear them.I was extreamly over joyed! I do believe the 2nd amendment is safe from what I've heard and read! And while the liberal news media may not make this public, I do think dianne Finestine and Obama get their share of pro-2nd amendment letters.Dianne finestine will NOT do the will of the people no more than Obama will because they think they know better than the american people.However I am determined to keep the pressure on them to keep our rights protected ,No matter how long it takes! NRA-4-Ever!
What the anti-gun crusaders pray for-frequently pray for Out Loud, are timely mass shooting events to arouse the the public stupidity. Sustained public stupidity is their stock in trade.
Remember, everyone, if the government can take away someone else's Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, they can also take away any of your Constitutionally protected rights.
OK, lads 'n' lasses. So OhBummer says that he has "23 executive actions" that he can take against Americans who own guns or who seek to acquire these instruments of self-defense.
That lying fascist sack of shxt did not quote the specific Constitutional language which justifies each such action that he proposes.
Instead, he and Axelrod ginned-up some kiddies to use as human shields — with coached language for kiddie letters — and publicly whizzed his propaganda all over their impressionable brains.
And have the Republicans had the cojones to torpedo that pathological son of a bxtch? I'll bet that the Republicans will just roll over as the OhBummer dictatorship crashes "Forward!"
In the tumultuous war of words about "gun control," we had better think instead in terms of "government control" — not "government control of the people," mind you — but instead, "people control of their own lives" — which means — "people control of the government."
When the fascist Democrats argue for "gun control," what they really mean is "control of the lives of the people." "Les Miserables" — and indeed, all of us — have the Right of Revolution against a government which seeks to disarm us and prevent the exercise of that Right of Revolution. We are under no obligation whatever to surrender to fascist statism — or to any other brand of statism, for all that.
I am reminded of New Hampshire Congressman Daniel Webster's Dec. 9th, 1814 speech before Congress on the subject of military — and other — CONSCRIPTION of Americans into involuntary servitude…..
"A military force cannot be raised, in this manner," he said, "but by the means of a military force. If the administration has found that it cannot form an army without conscription, it will find, if it venture on these experiments, that it cannot enforce conscription without an army.
"The Government was not constituted for such purposes. Framed in the spirit of liberty, and in the love of peace, it has no powers which render it able to enforce such laws. The attempt, if we rashly make it, will fail; and having already thrown away our peace, we may thereby throw away our Government."
See at — http://mises.org/journals/lar/pdfs/1_2/1_2_5.pdf
In like circumstances, the OhBummer dictatorship may move to seize what OhBummer dishonestly calls "military-style assault weapons." Such lying should entail a LEGAL, unappealable and immediate death penalty — but leave that issue aside, for another time. I think that he will openly declare war on the American citizen who knows his own right of self-defense, and end as dictator Ceausescu and his filthy, murderous wife ended — they expired of lead poisoning in a Romanian gutter.
In order to effectively steal these weapons, the OhBummer dictatorship will have to mobilize the terrorist Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms — and the US Army, to operate on American soil — for the first time since the Civil War, 1861 – 1865.
I am convinced that OhBummer does want a race war — and a war between the "makers" and the "takers" — between the productive, self-supporting citizenry — and the lying, arrogant, bloodsxcking, tax-eating, axxwipe maggot Democrats, and the FleaBaggers and other left-wing trash who will fight alongside them.
But he may find that the US Army will fire on HIM — rather than on their countrymen. That, I hope, will be the case, if this pathological President decides that he has the power and authority to disarm the American people by the theft of their weaponry.
What kind of weaponry? Weaponry sufficient to the task clearly set forth by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution — the government's "job description" — and by America's founding "mission statement" — the Declaration of Independence, which incorporates neatly under the Ninth Amendment.
Now, government cannot give or take human rights because 1] rights do not originate with government, and 2] there is no right to violate rights.
Whether one believes that human rights originate by the benevolence of a "divine power" — the gift by a god — or that human rights are inherent in the simple fact of being human — there is no case for the idea that human rights "originate" with government.
Who is government, after all? We are ruled by armed force and by fraud by lying, thieving, greedy-for-the-unearned, government hoodlums, gangsters, and thugs, by spies, spooks, and snoops, and by their sticky-fingered parasite constituents. And they are our "protectors" — just ask them and this predatory humanitarian Mafia will tell you so.
Who protects us from our protectors? The outspoken American citizen under the First Amendment — and the armed citizen under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Taken together, they are — as they were forever and always intended to be — a revolutionary force.
The Bill of Rights to the US Constitution recognizes and lists certain natural human rights — within the First Amendment to the US Constitution, among others — which calls-out the rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.
And not to digress, by the way — now that we are all able to publish on the internet, we are all now "journalists" — with the same First Amendment Constitutional protections enjoyed by ABC, CBS, NBC, et alia — without the necessity of being "licensed to publish" or "licensed to broadcast" by the armed-and-dangerous political freaks who rule us.
The Second Amendment recognizes that the legendary "tree of liberty" is from time to time and in the words of Thomas Jefferson "refreshed by the blood of tyrants and patriots" — so that privately-owned weaponry SUFFICIENT TO THE TASK of overthrowing a tyrant, a despot, a dictator, a gangster, etc, is maintained free of confiscation or prohibition by the tyrant, the despot, the dictator, the gangster — or by the "parliamentary despotism" decried by Samuel Adams — etc, etc, ad nauseam.
The professional DICTOCRATS are precisely aware of these Second Amendment facts — and for that reason they wish to attenuate or destroy the Second Amendment to the US Constitution — and then disarm and silence, those whom they would regulate, rob, plunder, and rule.
In short, the Democrats fear an armed citizenry — they fear justice — and well they should, as they are enemies of the privately-employed, non-government taxpayers of America.
Well, what of those "human rights" mentioned above?
I speak of the unalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
A slave is owned by someone other than himself — but a free man owns himself.
The first article of private property is "the self" — and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights.
These rights —- The Rights of Man —- are the gift of nature or of nature's god —- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat or other leftist who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words.
Meanwhile, hide the silverware — and your wallet — and your guns — from those lying, thieving, sticky-fingered fascist bxstxrds.
Hide your children, too. Every dictator attempts to disarm his intended victims. He does it "for the children" — as if to say that dictatorship is good for children — and certainly not that dictators are good only as practice targets, for NY Governor Cuomo's "deer hunters."
And one last thing. Show OhBummer the open contempt and disrespect — and disobedience — that he deserves.
Osamas Pajamas
It's not about the NRA, Obama or anything else other than maintaining the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. The rest is just noise.
No, you've got it all wrong. The argument is what it is, it's what it's ALWAYS have been. We've always had the 2nd amendment. What's happening is, the country is not falling for the stupid liberal argument of banning guns.
If we didn't already have the 2nd, and were presenting two different, separate arguments on it, then you would be right. This is the radical left wing failing. Period. And that's good too, any time they fail is good for the country.
Personally, I don't care what the reason for the 2nd amendment is. For me, the argument is "If the radical liberals change the Constitution in such a way to eliminate the 2nd amendment, then what's to stop them from changing ANYTHING in it?"
How about the first amendment? They'll soon change that to eliminate political speech they disagree with, because it incites violence. Pretty soon, concervative speech simply will not be allowed.
Don't believe me? Look at almost any college campus, where Ann Coulter gets shut down every time she shows up. The already had, and want again, the absurdly named "fairness doctrine". Look at almost any street preacher, they've been shut down. Any preachers at a "gay pride" event? nope, not allowed.
Don't forget, they have already come for our guns, more than once that *I* know of. Right after Katrina and a tornado in the midwest after Katrina. Surprise "attacks" on people by the police, grabbing guns. Almost none of those guns made it back to their original owners either.
After telling us for years "we're not coming after your guns!", they're coming after our guns. Don't tell me "we're not coming after your guns!" They already have, and they're doing it now. (especially since the laws they propose, do not apply to them. Plus, what makes them think that guns won't be smuggled into the country, they can't stop drugs, but guns will be stopped? That's just insane.)
Chinese Communist Party Mouthpiece Demands Obama Disarm Americans Again.
Paul Joseph Watson
January 29, 2013
Global Times, a newspaper described as an "angry Chinese government mouthpiece,"
recently published an editorial in which it called for "urgent gun control," in the
United States, the second Chinese Communist Party publication to do so within the last
The newspaper's January 17 front page editorial entitled Political inertia hinders gun
control action, states that there is "clearly an urgent need for gun control in the
US," lamenting that it will "be impossible for the country to ban guns."
Striking an authoritarian tone, the editorial notes how, "The difficulties in
promoting gun control show that US society lacks authorities willing and able to push
forward reform." Presumably, if the United States were a one party dictatorship like
China, such "reforms" would be far easier to implement.
Nobel Peace Prize Nominee: Obama Asks Military Leaders If They Will "Fire On US
Paul Joseph Watson
January 22, 2013
2009 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jim Garrow shockingly claims he was told by a top
military veteran that the Obama administration's "litmus test" for new military
leaders is whether or not they will obey an order to fire on U.S. citizens.
Garrow was nominated three years ago for the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize and is the
founder of The Pink Pagoda Girls, an organization dedicated to rescuing baby girls
from "gendercide" in China. Garrow has been personally involved in "helping rescue
more than 36,000 Chinese baby girls from death." He is a public figure, not an
anonymous voice on the Internet, which makes his claim all the more disturbing.
"I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a
new "litmus test" in determining who will stay and who must go in his military
leaders. Get ready to explode folks. "The new litmus test of leadership in the
military is if they will fire on US citizens or not". Those who will not are being
removed," Garrow wrote on his Facebook page, later following up the post by adding the
man who told him is, "one of America's foremost military heroes," whose goal in
divulging the information was to "sound the alarm."
More than 40 years ago I learned in the Military about the business end of a rifle or a pistol. In that training, I learned that an enemy is intent on killing you, no matter who you are. I was flying helicopters in Vietnam (Air Rescue) not tactical, meaning we were flying "slicks", no gun mounts, it was written in the Geneva Convention, I still have a copy of. The old philosophy was you would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. To anybody who has never seen WAR, much less seeing deadly tracer fire coming toward you while you and the Pilot in Command MUST keep their hands on controls, in case one of us got lit up. Sure, we had side arms, but for a sniper, we were an easy target especially because we had a big red cross on the nose and side doors of the helicopter didn't mean squat to the squatters, So after getting my Honorable Discharge, I was bound for College. Tempers from much younger people who never saw a bullet or a daisy cutter bomb, napalm, agent orange, etc. had no experience in such matters. Can't blame them really, they were not forced in to the Military. I do have my doughts about killing children, mass murders that could have been stopped. I believe in rigger locks, I see no reason for sniper rifles (as what happened in Washington, DC area)
I'm still figuring why a hunter or a sportsman needs a silencer, but worse, why do you need to carry. A few Doctors say 5%, and a few Lawyers say 5%, make the whole Profession disgraced. I have no problem with a gun vault, because I can never forget the little girl who hid in her Parents' closet to surprise her Dad, he shot her and as she was dying, she said that's okay Dad. That, like many other stories just break my heart. Look, if it's a power thing for brutes, shut 'em down. I don't like crime anymore than anybody. Maybe a little training could go a long way. I don't find this funny at all. I know the gun manufacturers have Lawyers, as the Small Aircraft like to went under for all of the Lawyers blaming the Aircraft for killing their Clients. Even sharks have to eat.
I respect your service, but I cannot make heads or tails of your comment.
As with any dangerous tool, a firearm should never be handled without the proper mechanical and psychological training. I think more harm is done by a media culture of violence and death that inculcates each generation with the glamour of the power of a firearm as an ephemeral problem solver. It is not. there are dire concequences to using a gun in any defensive circumstance. The respect that ought to be in place for any gun is being replaced with a mindless fear driven by Democrats and Progressives. It is a cynical end-run around the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Responsible Americans should be outraged that their precious Liberties are being insidiously eroded in such a craven manner: another trumped-up crisis over 'assault' weapons that does not exist.
I would suggest you sit down and mull it over. Nobody has been promised security in the Bill of Rights. We are all supposed to be masters of our own destiny in this country. Democrats simply do not agree with that premise.
"More than 40 years ago I learned in the Military about the business end of a rifle or a pistol. In that training, I learned that an enemy is intent on killing you, no matter who you are. I was flying helicopters in Vietnam (Air Rescue) not tactical, meaning we were flying "slicks", no gun mounts, it was written in the Geneva Convention, I still have a copy of. The old philosophy was you would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. To anybody who has never seen WAR, much less seeing deadly tracer fire coming toward you while you and the Pilot in Command MUST keep their hands on controls, in case one of us got lit up. Sure, we had side arms, but for a sniper, we were an easy target especially because we had a big red cross on the nose and side doors of the helicopter didn't mean squat to the squatters, So after getting my Honorable Discharge, I was bound for College. Tempers from much younger people who never saw a bullet or a daisy cutter bomb, napalm, agent orange, etc. had no experience in such matters. Can't blame them really, they were not forced in to the Military. I do have my doughts about killing children, mass murders that could have been stopped. I believe in rigger locks, I see no reason for sniper rifles (as what happened in Washington, DC area)
I'm still figuring why a hunter or a sportsman needs a silencer, but worse, why do you need to carry. A few Doctors say 5%, and a few Lawyers say 5%, make the whole Profession disgraced. I have no problem with a gun vault, because I can never forget the little girl who hid in her Parents' closet to surprise her Dad, he shot her and as she was dying, she said that's okay Dad. That, like many other stories just break my heart. Look, if it's a power thing for brutes, shut 'em down. I don't like crime anymore than anybody. Maybe a little training could go a long way. I don't find this funny at all. I know the gun manufacturers have Lawyers, as the Small Aircraft like to went under for all of the Lawyers blaming the Aircraft for killing their Clients. Even sharks have to eat.
When you have your facts straight and speak the truth, sooner or later it sinks in to the people who listen. So of course the NRA is winning.
The truth trumps a lie among regular people.
The biggest problem with the entire debate over gun control is the likelihood that none of the legislative measures being examined would have prevented the tragedies that have been in the news.
Perhaps congress should simply outlaw evil once and for all. it could then move on to a problem it can actually solve- if that's even possible.
Semi-autos and large capacity magazines have been available for decades. 20 or 30 years ago, you didn't have once a month mass murder and suicide but you certainly had the means. For over a century, you could stripper clip a bolt rifle in less than one second or speed load a revolver in the same time.
What changed was not the means but the culture. Hollywood has habituated and desensitized tens of millions to a level of violence inconceivable just a few decades ago. What percentage of those habituated and desensitized turn into mass murderers? An infinitesimal percentage is still high enough to produce the real not celluloid violence that we see today. But this is a First not Second Amendment über alles country.
We're told these guns are pure instruments of war, only fit to put as many shots out on the battlefield in as short a time possible. Oh, really? Try Googling "DHS 7000 assault guns". What "battlefield" is DHS planning to assault? What latter day Iwo Jima awaits Big Sis? Ditto for everyday LEO with their high capacity Glocks and SIGs and ARs with 30 round banana mags in the trunk. What "war" on what "battlefield" are they planning to fight. Give them back their 38s and 12 gauge pumps!
A few years ago, some wacko started shooting people on the observation deck of the Empire State Building. I remember thinking at the time, what would I do? Would I cower in a corner and shield my woman with my body? Or would I have the courage to rush the gunman and sacrifice myself by taking him down, knowing how difficult instant incapacitation of a fast moving 6'2″ 190 pound male can be? One thing was certain, and that was I was limited to those two scenarios, cowardice or sacrifice, because the well meaning morons in control of government in this area of the country made certain that I would not be armed.
Charlton Heston got it exactly right. I am not going to allow myself to become completely defenseless.
The Republicans are MIA on the gun rights issue because they have been shamed into silence about anything and everything thanks to the American Pravda. The powerful American Pravda has won every argument with their lock-step methods and is well on the way to extinguishing the Repubs influence completely. Welcome to the USSA!
When Newton demanded armed guards, they gave in to the NRA and to logic.
Logic that states that bad things are less likely to happen in the vicinity of a Cop.
Its old logic, with a successful track record that can trace its ancestry back to Shepherds discovering they lost less sheep when they had a big dog in the herd.
I guess to some, what was old is new again.
Fact is the entire bill of rights can be attacked on the premise that each of those rights makes the world more "dangerous."
What is next" a president with kids on his lap explaining suspension of the fourth and filth amendments because they cause even more deaths than the second?
You are correct. The Bill of Rights is the most dangerous document on Earth to Totalitarians everywhere.
And soon to be RE-dedicated!!!
Thanks to articles like these: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172661/-How-to-Ban-Guns-A-step-by-step-long-term-process
OUt of everyone speaking and yelling and arguing and not listening to each other the NRA are the only actually suggesting a plan of action that will protect our kids right now.
The difference is, in history real change is always created by the few, not the many. We have an activist President, Gabby Giffords and the Brady Center, which is more than enough power to unseat the corrupt lobby of the NRA — a village mob lead by an incoherent, lunatic who twists facts into very poor arguments to justify continued massacres. The NRA has yet to put up a common sense argument that justifies assault weapon ownership in the public sphere. Owning a gun is perfectly fine, owning massacre machines isnt socially beneficial or acceptable.
The pro control group can make many rock solid arguments against assault weapons. Simply put, the right to own a firearm doesnt give you the right to own a shoulder rocket launcher. Just like you cant yell fire in a crowded location, you dont get the right to own any kind of firearm. There is a point of too much potential for danger. That is where gun control activists have the power of common sense under their feet.
Heres another argument — you can own a pet in your backyard. But you cant own a lion. Even if you are a lion tamer, and you swear you have tamed the lion, the lion is docile, and the lion is chained, nobody in their right mind would accept that their neighbor has a lion in their backyard. Assault weapons are the lion in the backyard
No one sells "assault" weapons except the liars in the Democrat party and in the Democrat-captured medai — which is the principal propaganda arm of the Democrat party.
Now, OhBummer says that he has "23 executive actions" that he can take against Americans who own guns or who seek to acquire these instruments of self-defense.
That lying fascist sack of shxt did not quote the specific Constitutional language which justifies each such action that he proposes.
Instead, he and Axelrod ginned-up some kiddies to use as human shields — with coached language for kiddie letters — and publicly whizzed his propaganda all over their impressionable brains.
And have the Republicans had the cojones to torpedo that pathological son of a bxtch? I'll bet that the Republicans will just roll over as the OhBummer dictatorship crashes "Forward!"
In the tumultuous war of words about "gun control," we had better think instead in terms of "government control" — not "government control of the people," mind you — but instead, "people control of their own lives" — which means — "people control of the government."
When the fascist Democrats argue for "gun control," what they really mean is "control of the lives of the people." "Les Miserables" — and indeed, all of us — have the Right of Revolution against a government which seeks to disarm us and prevent the exercise of that Right of Revolution. We are under no obligation whatever to surrender to fascist statism — or to any other brand of statism, for all that.
I am reminded of New Hampshire Congressman Daniel Webster's Dec. 9th, 1814 speech before Congress on the subject of military — and other — CONSCRIPTION of Americans into involuntary servitude…..
"A military force cannot be raised, in this manner," he said, "but by the means of a military force. If the administration has found that it cannot form an army without conscription, it will find, if it venture on these experiments, that it cannot enforce conscription without an army.
"The Government was not constituted for such purposes. Framed in the spirit of liberty, and in the love of peace, it has no powers which render it able to enforce such laws. The attempt, if we rashly make it, will fail; and having already thrown away our peace, we may thereby throw away our Government."
See at — http://mises.org/journals/lar/pdfs/1_2/1_2_5.pdf
In like circumstances, the OhBummer dictatorship may move to seize what OhBummer dishonestly calls "military-style assault weapons." Such lying should entail a LEGAL, unappealable and immediate death penalty — but leave that issue aside, for another time. I think that he will openly declare war on the American citizen who knows his own right of self-defense, and end as dictator Ceausescu and his filthy, murderous wife ended — they expired of lead poisoning in a Romanian gutter.
In order to effectively steal these weapons, the OhBummer dictatorship will have to mobilize the terrorist Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms — and the US Army, to operate on American soil — for the first time since the Civil War, 1861 – 1865.
I am convinced that OhBummer does want a race war — and a war between the "makers" and the "takers" — between the productive, self-supporting citizenry — and the lying, arrogant, bloodsxcking, tax-eating, axxwipe maggot Democrats, and the FleaBaggers and other left-wing trash who will fight alongside them.
But he may find that the US Army will fire on HIM — rather than on their countrymen. That, I hope, will be the case, if this pathological President decides that he has the power and authority to disarm the American people by the theft of their weaponry.
What kind of weaponry? Weaponry sufficient to the task clearly set forth by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution — the government's "job description" — and by America's founding "mission statement" — the Declaration of Independence, which incorporates neatly under the Ninth Amendment.
Now, government cannot give or take human rights because 1] rights do not originate with government, and 2] there is no right to violate rights.
Whether one believes that human rights originate by the benevolence of a "divine power" — the gift by a god — or that human rights are inherent in the simple fact of being human — there is no case for the idea that human rights "originate" with government.
Who is government, after all? We are ruled by armed force and by fraud by lying, thieving, greedy-for-the-unearned, government hoodlums, gangsters, and thugs, by spies, spooks, and snoops, and by their sticky-fingered parasite constituents. And they are our "protectors" — just ask them and this predatory humanitarian Mafia will tell you so.
Who protects us from our protectors? The outspoken American citizen under the First Amendment — and the armed citizen under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Taken together, they are — as they were forever and always intended to be — a revolutionary force.
The Bill of Rights to the US Constitution recognizes and lists certain natural human rights — within the First Amendment to the US Constitution, among others — which calls-out the rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.
And not to digress, by the way — now that we are all able to publish on the internet, we are all now "journalists" — with the same First Amendment Constitutional protections enjoyed by ABC, CBS, NBC, et alia — without the necessity of being "licensed to publish" or "licensed to broadcast" by the armed-and-dangerous political freaks who rule us.
The Second Amendment recognizes that the legendary "tree of liberty" is from time to time and in the words of Thomas Jefferson "refreshed by the blood of tyrants and patriots" — so that privately-owned weaponry SUFFICIENT TO THE TASK of overthrowing a tyrant, a despot, a dictator, a gangster, etc, is maintained free of confiscation or prohibition by the tyrant, the despot, the dictator, the gangster — or by the "parliamentary despotism" decried by Samuel Adams — etc, etc, ad nauseam.
The professional DICTOCRATS are precisely aware of these Second Amendment facts — and for that reason they wish to attenuate or destroy the Second Amendment to the US Constitution — and then disarm and silence, those whom they would regulate, rob, plunder, and rule.
In short, the Democrats fear an armed citizenry — they fear justice — and well they should, as they are enemies of the privately-employed, non-government taxpayers of America.
Well, what of those "human rights" mentioned above?
I speak of the unalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
A slave is owned by someone other than himself — but a free man owns himself.
The first article of private property is "the self" — and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights.
These rights —- The Rights of Man —- are the gift of nature or of nature's god —- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat or other leftist who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words.
Meanwhile, hide the silverware — and your wallet — and your guns — from those lying, thieving, sticky-fingered fascist bxstxrds.
Hide your children, too. Every dictator attempts to disarm his intended victims. He does it "for the children" — as if to say that dictatorship is good for children — and certainly not that dictators are good only as practice targets, for NY Governor Cuomo's "deer hunters."
And one last thing. Show OhBummer the open contempt and disrespect — and disobedience — that he deserves.
Osamas Pajamas
"You darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments; who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism, tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check.
"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, and supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth?
If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom – go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
"Courage, then, my countrymen, our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause, as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?"
"It does not take a majority to prevail….but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
"Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can."
"The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
Anyone who brings up the UK or Japanese model are using code words for total confiscation. Unless "moderates" distance themselves far from these extremists and positively reaffirm the 2nd Amendment as the individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, they are not to be trusted with any "reasonable common sense" gun control. The conversation ends right there. Better background checks and databases, fine. Better mental health procedures, fine. Honest negotiators must completely disavow this:
Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns – A step-by-step long term process
Never read or heard so great a post!
So there may still be hope that "common sense" rules the day? hooray
If there is no agenda, why is it referred to as pro-gun control and anti-gun control, as opposed to pro-gun and anti-gun?
"Newton Fig" it would help your "argument" if you had any idea what you were talking about. From the other posts on this article, it's clear that you will be largely ignored because they are aware that a semi-automatic rifle is not what you apparently think it is. The so-called "assault weapons" which have you concerned are mid-power rifles used frequently for both hunting and sport. (Not that the 2nd Amendment is about hunting or sports.) Go and take a firearms training course, or even a hunter safety course, read Joyce Malcolm's scholarly work on the history of the right to bear arms, and bother to comment only once you are aware of the difference between a .223 and a .308, and also the difference between a right and the concept of legislation.
2 men vote to rape the 1 woman on their desert island – that's democracy.
Throw in the US Bill Of Rights (Amendments 1 – 10 US Constitution) and that lady can buy a fully automatic AK-47 and shoot the 2 Liberals trying to impregnate her; self defense.
"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" – 2nd Amendment to US Constitution.
The 2nd Amendment is there to protect the minority from the majority. I don't need Obama's permission to buy a AR-15 and use it in self defense – it's my right in the US Bill of Rights.
Any person usurping the 2nd Amendment is asking for a lot of trouble from those of us who do believe in the Bill Of Rights………
It's pretty easy to win when 54% of Americans already support the NRA's position, according to a Gallup poll conducted AFTER Sandy Hook.
There is a reason the NRA is the most powerful political lobby in the country: It has more CITIZENS who support it than any other lobby. That's how democracy works.
I don't give a fig for polls- manipulated numbers for the ingnorant unwilling to think for themselves.
The NRA is but a small reflection of Americans who understand and believe in the legacy left to us by our Founding Fathers: The Constitution.
If you do not support the Constitution, you are a traitor to the ideals of Liberty.
You mean "common sense" may still rule the day!! hooray
I am an NRA member and usually don't get involved other than paying my dues.
I have NEVER written letters, called or emailed politicains, never went to ANY rallies, printed flyers, talked to people or got invoved before.
That has all changed NOW. I am completely and totally ACTIVE.
1. 60 Letters to the New York State Senators – against Cuomo's Gun Grab Law.
2. 18 Letters to the New York State Senators – thanking the Senators who voted for law abiding Citizens in New York State.
3. Going to my State Capital for the Feburary 8th rally. Already bought my bus ticket and got the day off.
4. Preparing 100 Letters for ALL the DC Senators.
5. Brought my teenage daughter to the range already 3x. She loves it and I'm going to be taking her until she leaves this house. (I will my yongest daughter when she is old enough)
6. Donated 10% of my last gun purchase to the NRA.
7. Joined the New York State Rifle Association
8. Joined the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms (I am a Catholic)
9. Will continue to get as many friends and relatives into this SPORT as possible.
10. I will Never Give up and never Forget who is against my rights.
Great post, and I hope the trend you represent continues. Many forget, based on lousy press coverage, that the NRA is not merely a "lobby." It is a grassroots organization composed of American Citizens, and is the nation's number one source of gun safety programs.
Please stop using the leftist catch phrase "gun rights." There is no such thing.
There is however, a natural, God-given, civil, Constitutional right to keep and bear arms – absolute, uninfringable – these leftist tools are doing their worst to strip from us.
Their end game?
Look at the idyllic worker's paradises and the peaceful history of Cuba, North Korea, Rwanda, Germany, Zimbabwe, Russis, China and every other country on the planet having disarmed its citizens under leftist rule has led them to enslavement and genocide.
Gun rights?
You probably wouldn't say "car rights" or "house rights" or "church rights," with the same imprecision of thought the phrase is meaningless and absurd on its face.
There are no "Gun rights," just the right to keep and bear arms in defense of self, family, property from thugs and in the face of a repressive and tyrannical government which would prefer you to be disarmed before exerting its will on you.
Can't happen in America? Tell that to the native Americans.
Too many political hacks have been attempting to take advantage of the victims at Sandy Hook. Just listen to their rhetoric and you will realize that they have no knowledge of firearms and are only promoting laws that will give us a false sense of security.
I would like to see each and every one of them post a sign on their front lawns that states "This is a gun free home." We will never see it.
Our police forces play a vital role in our communities.
They are NOT your personal protection.
The second amendment is!
The second amendment is very clear to me – I couldn't care less about opinions and influence….
The inevitability of time. Things get done in DC by riding waves and if they aren't going to break in the next 24 hours, it's difficult to get momentum for your side, in this case pro gun control. On the other hand, the anti gun control crowd have been pretty effective getting their message out that the various rumors on legislation will have as much impact on firearm caused deaths as it would be to ban anyone becoming a pilot because of the hijacking terrorists.
1934 Congress Banned Automatics. This was done because Police were coming out on the wrong end when confronted by Gangsters using Thompson Sub Machine Guns.
This Ban has never been repealed.
This new Ban by Congresswoman Dianne Feinstein is total encroachment to limit the 2nd Amendment anyway they can…..! There by using Cosmetics features to identify the erroneous term Assault Weapon, Politicians coined for there purposes to further limit firearms that were not included in 1934.
Their agenda is simple, to make sure American's cant defend themselves against a Tyrannical Government.
I'm a Vet from Vietnam 1967. 1000 US Army Green Berets recently came out with Marines and called out these lying Politicians on their coined term Assault Weapons. They were told, Your Wrong, these weapons are not Assault Weapons and this Ban will not pass.
Matter fact you've encroached to much on our rights and we want the 1934 Ban on Fire Arms lifted.
These Crazy Politicians are going to start an American Revolt and the Military will not stand with them.
They need to sit down and fix the economy instead of being fearful about Americans rising up with weapons, coming to Washington and shooting the place up….!
Then again, maybe this is the agenda Obama and the Communists in Washington want to happen………!
I think there would be more credibility in gun-control policy if the Obama administration was not involved. It's weird preaching preventing unstable individuals and psychoppaths from having access to guns, as the Obama folks say, while selling, I mean, giving 16 high-powered jets to Egypt, a nation that is both unstable and psychopathic in its religious-political beliefs. Obama has no credibility on this issue and Biden, well, let's just say old uncle Joe needs to retire and play with his grandchildren.
I, as an Amerian citizen takes in consideration that this is not just about the desires of what benefits, controls or even the power in which one has, but it's about the nature of the individuality of our society as a whole, there has been so many families affected by the lack of control as to the distribution and obtainability of artillery weapons in any case. I being a victim of a crime involving guns has lost several love ones as a result of someone on the street in regardless to how it was obtain having a gun, has lost; partner of 14 years, his worker, niece, nephew and even myself was shot, and by the grace of GOD I'm still here, somewhere this line has to be drawn for the benefit of our country as a whole…for the safety of our children, elderly, under-privileged, neighborhoods, communities, cities, states, country, and our world as a unity…..
I too am concerned Carolyn- that's why I own a gun, practice responsible ownership and have a carry permit.
The police and government cannot be your personal protection – the second amendment is….
When I saw the power grab the left was making by exploiting the tragedy, I signed up with the NRA for the first time – a 3 year membership. When the left got shrill and accusatory, I sent another $100 donation to the NRA.
Do I own a rifle?
None of your business!
Do you get to tell me if I can?
In the end, opinions are irrelevant. The law of the land, at least as it should be understood, is that the Second Amendment cannot be infringed. PERIOD! Since Marxists wish to dismantle America and they have succeeded at an unprecedented and alarming rate, consider the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto have long been completed here in the U.S., they must make the "lawful" changes via Constitutional convention. Three fifths of the states must agree to the disarming of "WE THE PEOPLE" in order to enforce this unconstitutional action. But then again, we no longer follow the U.S. Constitution and in March of 2013, the United States will be ruled by the third world and Communists via the United Nations. America literally has only one final month of existence before we completely fall as a Sovereign nation. We shall see how many Americans are slaughtered by this rogue renegade government before patriot Americans respond. We shall soon see. The clock has run out. One month folks. Just one final month!
The right to "keep and bear arms" is a Constitutionally-protected CIVIL RIGHT, unlike "gay marriage", which isn't even mentioned in the document. The right is protected for the use of SELF DEFENSE (vs. evil citizens or governments), not hunting or "sport". In the 1700′s, people needed to hunt or they would die of starvation. The Founding Fathers certainly couldn't even imagine having to guarantee the right to firearms in order to feed one's self and family! As expensive as gunpowder and lead was back then, they didn't go out and shoot paper targets "just for fun", either…….
Time to clean house. Who do these people think they are counter-intending the Constitution and our freedoms and rights? It has NEVER been the gun's fault someone got shot, it is the shooter's fault and removing guns from society will not solve the problem. It never has and has only made matters worse when criminals have guns and law abiding citizens don't. Many people are afraid of guns because they don't understand them and how to use one whether they would or not.
That is not a reason to ban guns. That is a personal reaction based on fear and not common sense. It hasn't and will not solve the problem.
The reason we still have shooters killing kids is because the shooters have a problem so far not addressed and fixed. What is creating people to suddenly want to murder other people in mass?????
Independent investigations of all the shootings done by an international organization that is more than qualified to do them has proven that all the shooters so far except one were on or just coming off psychiatric drugs. This organization is Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR.org. The Black Warning labels on each bottle of psychotropic drugs clearly warns that these drugs may cause violent reactions in people who take them. THAT IS THE COMMON DENOMINATOR THAT CAME UP. It is the ONLY fact that is a real reason someone would want to commit a mass execution of other people and directly connects shootings with a real reason why and a reason that can be handled and done away with without stripping the American people of their 2nd Amendment rights and taking away the one method they have for protecting themselves and their families and friends from these psychiatric drug influenced killers. and those who have a vested interest in the profits from sales of those drugs on a completely fraudulent basis. Millions of other kids and adults are committing suicide as a result of taking these drugs but you don't hear about all of that. So they either kill themselves or other people and themselves.
The NRA should team up with CCHR to gather data in fighting this insanity.
We have millions of people on psychiatric drugs in this country including children and even infants. WHY???????
The Psychs have labeled every common everyday problem a person might have in any day as a mental health disease. And the solution to these problems is a drug. People have decided it is easier to take a risky drug rather than confront their problems in life and handling them, taking responsibility for them. Or they force drugs on over active kids rather than having them tested for food allergies and the like.
The Black Labels on these bottles say that these drugs have side effects of violent behavior as well as suicidal tendencies and many more dangerous side effects. THAT IS THE CAUSE OF SOME PEOPLE AND KIDS BECOMING SHOOTERS. IT'S NOT THE GUNS. GUNS ARE FOR PROTECTION AND WITHOUT THEM THE SHOOTERS CAN KILL AT WILL. IF GUNS ARE BANNED, SHOOTER AND CRIMINALS CAN ALWAYS GET GUNS ON THE BLACK MARKET AND WILL. SAFE ZONES AT SCHOOLS IS LIKE ASSIGNING DEATH TO OUR KIDS. THERE ARE NO GUNS TO PROTECT THEM. THAT LAW NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. WE MUST VOTE OUT THESE IDIOTS OR IMPEACH THEM AND CLEAN HOUSE AND GET BACK TO COMMON SENSE. PEOPLE CAN LEARN ABOUT GUNS IN A SAFE ENVIRONMENT AND SHOULD DO THAT IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN TO HANDLE THEIR FEARS SO THEY CAN THINK STRAIGHT. PSYCH DRUGS ARE CREATING TICKING TIME BOMBS AND WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN AND OURSELVES AGAINST THE EFFECTS OF THOSE DRUGS UNTIL THEY ARE REMOVED FROM OUR SOCIETY.
No, Hollywood is the big winner.
Premise matters. Why has the debate been framed by big media as 'Gun Control' when other major components such as mental health, preventive law enforcement and the pervasive media culture of violence-for-big-profit are equally important and deserve top-line billing?
'Violence in America' and all of its facets is the discussion. However, make no mistake about it, to frame the debate right is a Pandora's box Hollywood wants kept sealed at all costs.
And who is doing Hollywood's bidding? From Fox to Comcast, the entire spectrum of mainstream media has been muzzled – starting with how they all quickly lock-stepped on 'Gun Control' – due to their major holdings in Hollywood, not to mention fear of losing access to their very exclusive circles.
Once again, big media is throwing democrats, republicans, independents et. al. under the bus because of their servitude to special interests who are both amoral and apolitical when it comes to getting theirs.
Nice try.
soooo many of us peons have sworn to uphold and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. we were fearless in our youth defending it against foreign enemies. we are as fearless in our old age defending it against domestic enemies. if they push us hard enough after our right to bear arms they will surely feel our timber when we take back our freedom of religion. semper fi…do or die
Mr Bruce Rogers,
My my, how times have changed – so your are a writer of "THOUGHT LEADERSHIP". Is this the newest term for PROPAGANDA or THOUGHT CONTROL? Gee, as an academic I must have missed the memo. Didn't the Russians spend decades proving THOUGHT CONTROL DOES NOT WORK!!!!
I grew up in a semi rural state and our men usually had guns and Rod & Gun Club events were frequent. The men, using their own money, would hold events, teach young people about shooting, caring for, cleaning and gun safety. When they felt a young person was responsible enough, they would honor that young person with their own gun, a Bee Bee Gun.
As I am slight of build and barely 5 feet 2 inches, I personally found the kick back from guns difficult to control and it threw my aim off. However, these same wonderful men, did help me become a moderate to good shot with a bow and arrow.
Why do you effete city slickers try and dictate how other people should live, or enjoy their well earned recreational time?? Guns are much much less dangerous than autos' or young people skate boarding recklessly. And gun safety is easier to learn than driving in the traffic choked cities where you live.
You started out saying you were just going to deal with facts. Other than very openly pushing for gun control, 2nd and 14th amendment Constitutional violators to become more active and engaged so the evil (in YOUR opinion) NRA does not win the influence war, there was no neutrality or plain observation in this thankfully brief article. However, said article does abound with YOUR extremely one-sided OPINION!
If you are reflective of staff at Forbes, than I, as an educator, believe it is incumbent on me, to advise my students that FORBES is now a glossy Opinion Rag, rather than a knowledgeable source on economics, and can no longer be used without 2 other sources to do research presentations.
Sad, as I used to look forward to my now cancelled subscription of Forbes. However, my integrity requires that I utilize experts that align with my educational philosophy, which is to teach students HOW to think. Propagandists, by whatever name they use, deserve less respect and acknowledgement that homeless bums. The bums are just trying to survive. Propagandists attempt to destroy individual creativity and minds, a very horrible thing to do to any young inquiring minds.
people can get whatever they want if they have money even if things are illegal.
there are some people who cant handle responsibilities that come with having freedoms & there is a price to pay to be free.
you need to be able to make sacrifices.
its way better having freedoms even if 1 out of 350 million people shoot up a school.
besides thats why you have a 2nd ammendment, to stop that 1 crazy person from harming little kids.
Interesting. I wonder if they accounted for the growing number of sheriffs, sheriffs' associations, and other law enforcement who've recently been coming forth stating their intentions to support second amendment rights and oppose any directives to the contrary.
There is a rumor reported by Dr. Jim Garrow that the Obama administration is implementing a 'litmus'
test for military commanders to see if they might be unwiling to give the order fire on civilians:
$$$ BILLIONS $$$ are being spent on advertising because they know it changes buying habits. To ignore the fact that pop culture 'approved' violence obviously 'desensitizes' us to the act of killing and is therefore directly a part of these mass shootings, is dangerous naivete or the payoff for a bribe. I see Sylvester Stallone is out against semi-auto rifles as his movie "Bullet to the Head" is hitting the theaters. He has to be a monumental hypocrite, greedy stinker, or something worse.
Hey everybody, enjoy the Super Bowl commercials.
Well I am sure it wont be long and the leftists will activate another of their mind controlled drones to buzz down another unsuspecting crown of unguarded innocents. After 30 years of doping our children and "counseling" them in private rooms who knows when the next one will be activated. Its just a sure bet.
Creating a crisis so it wont go to waste.
There have been dozens of shootings since Sandyhook where the shooters were stopped cold by armed civilians and/or police and they don't make the news because it is not in their agenda.
It's so obvious. Criminal and immoral.
THe battle is being won by those that still hold the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Obama is a psychopath who sold a record number of arms in 2011, and a record single sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Yes, the same theocratic dictatorship that kidnaps, tortures, and kills those that disagree with the regime. Let's not go into the 178 children that have been killed through Obama's drone strikes.
Has Feinstein, who voted for the Iraq war, opposed these arms sales? Of course not.
Between the two of them they have more blood on the hands than a butcher. We the people, will not be led to slaughter. As the saying goes, it is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
The Government is a bunch of hypocrites, the send guns to the drug cartel in Mexico, planes to Egypt, and who knows what else. America should not budge one inch on the issue, or we will be taken over by outside forces and who knows even our own government.
Lenny, glad to see you are taking an active part in expressing your views, din't be discouraged, and keep posting, thousands, maybe millions of us feel the same way, "we will not be silenced, if we speak out" like the saying goes regarding our rights, (if you don't use them, you lose them) It's time for us to fight back with words and actions, don't be intimidated and stand up for something, or fall for everything!!
Lenny Caputo posted a new comment on NRA Winning the Influence Battle Over Gun Control
" I am an NRA member and usually don't get involved other than paying my dues. I have NEVER written letters, called or emailed politicains, never… "
Great point. I think what he really wants is the same thing Hitler wanted. A nation of SNITCHES AND RATS that will report their patriotic neighbors to him and his hit army.
Lenny, glad to see you taking a stand and voicing your concern. We can no longer remain silent, action speak louder than words. If we don't stand for something, we fall for everything. Stay informed, and active, we need every voice to make the nut jobs in Washington hear our roar. "I am man, hear me roar, in numbers to big to ignore! Sorry gals, this is our fight too!!
Lenny Caputo posted a new comment on NRA Winning the Influence Battle Over Gun Control
" I am an NRA member and usually don't get involved other than paying my dues. I have NEVER written letters, called or emailed politicains, never… "
I have been writing my local police and sheriffs. Local and federal officials. I will not be shamed into a corner and refuse to let anything get banned.
The attempt to limit the constitutional rights of others is yet another step towards a Fascist state. All of these shooters were damaged by the drugs they took for the phony ADHD "disorder", which was a designer disorder created by the school system. The anti second amendment fascists refuse to see the real problem, so again there will be no solution.
Who SHOULD be winning the battle is the Supreme Court.
It has already held that arms in common use (which so-called "assault weapons" [sic] are) that have a reasonable relationship to the efficiency of a milita (which they DO) are protected under the Second Amendment.
Since it is precedent, i.e. THE LAW, that's all the "influence" anybody should need.
Looks like Christie will be going head-to-head with Biden and Hillary for the Dem ticket in 2016 cause he's flushing his appeal to conservatives down the toilet.
So the WH stages another Obama photo op to try to prove that Obama skeets "all the time". Only thing is, the moron is firing the gun at the horizon, skeets are launched up in the air. He probably shot the guy launching the skeets. If only it were Biden. Also the completely inexperienced way Obama is holding the shot gun pretty much guarantees him a very sore shoulder and maybe a black eye. Obama is pretty much inexperienced at everything he does. More fakery from the WH for this fake of a president.
Modern Republicans (but not conservatives) deserve to perish. They have no message, no cohesion, no principles, no backbone. The "leaders" of the Republican Party haven't figured out the treasonous media all work for king obozo, and STILL play along instead of addressing the people directly. The reality is that the taxocrats are paper tigers. What does it say about the Republican Party that it couldn't replace a marxist welfare president? Where there is no vision, the people perish.
The government should just leave our right alone
The Democrat gun grabbers and the Obummer/Marxists had everything they wanted in Conn. So called Assault type weapons banned, 10 round max, severe background checks etc. Everything they whine about. Fact, the police and laws in Conn did not protect the kids and school, Democrat policies failed completely, so now we see the default position. Go after the Legal Law abiding citizens. Anything to change the subject away from the Failures of Liberalism. If you really want to protect schools, quit electing Democrats and put some legal guards and guns in the schools, just as Sidwell Friends where Obummer sends his kids.
That we are even having such a debate is telling of how weak and dumbed down our people have become. This is America people….not Europe……we do things differently here……we have never been and never will be invaded because of the second amendment. The only danger is from within and that is the intent of the second amendment. Why in the world would any rational person want to give that up. The founders were not giving themselves permission to hunt…..hunting was the grocery store to them. They were insuring freedom from tyranny. As other world governments are afraid to try to take us over so should our own be. Your government is never to be trusted…..not ever
This is usually the case with an ignorant movement supported by know nothing liberals who do nothing except shout slogans just to make themselves feel good and inflate their egos.
Remember the free tibet movement? Me neither.
Not an NRA member. Never been an NRA member. About to become an NRA member.
We need to stop thinking Democrat or Republican……they have both let us down and have been in power for way to long……we need a constitutional government and to teach each generation what a wonderful document it is. Nothing else like it to give an even playing field to freedom loving people. Stop waiting for the two major parties to do the right thing…..they can't remember what that is…..if they ever knew
NRA Adding More Than 10,000 New Members – Per Day!
Instead of characterizing the NRA's position as 'winning the influence battle over gun control', it may be more apropos to reflect that the NRA is a principled organization that is presenting the primary fact that the US Constitution's Second Amendment as adopted on December 15, 1791 is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
I must be missing something, how does the use of background checks equal disarming America? Surely working to prevent weapons reaching criminals is a good thing.
Hugh, background checks have nothing to do with 99% of the gun crime.
And the NRA is not opposed to background checks. they have always supported them. they are opposed to them with private sales. Fienstien is proposing that i cost hundreds of dollars to pass a few funs down to ones son or daughter.
NONE of hte spree murders would have ben affected whatsoever by what biden and Feinstein are proposing.
"Keep in mind Forbes Insights has no agenda other than to shed research light on the process of measuring influence and what we can learn from it."
And yet you framed the research in terms of "pro gun control" and "anti-gun control" instead of "pro Second Amendment" and "anti-second amendment". this shows your bias!
Here are some links that might inform your position on assault rifles.
"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Chairman Mao
The organization Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership has a very interesting chart with the historical genocides listed alongside the accompanying gun control law that was supposed to keep everyone safe.
It is titled "Death by gun control"
Can our government be guaranteed to be benign for all time? I do not think so. Governments change a lot. If you think about it, the US is one of the oldest governments in the world. China, Japan, Germany, India all very different since the 1700s. The point is you never know when your government is going to turn lethal on you so you should be in a position to make it very expensive for any evil lethal government to exert its ways.
This law review, "Of Holocausts and Gun Control,75 Wash.U.L.Q. 1237(online)" raises some interesting points such as this:
"but it is nevertheless an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed."
What most gun control advocates want is a government controlled monopoly on lethal violence. Then the dangerous assumption they are positing is that the government, although it changes hands every four or two or six years will always be benign. Remember, the pendulum swings and the government you like today can be the tyrant who hates you, and your kind, tomorrow. Ask the Jewish people of WW2 Europe or the Armenians in Turkey or how about the Cambodians of the seventies if they thought their governing apparatus was going to turn on them lethally?
Do you want that tyrant to have a monopoly on lethal violence?
That is the very point of military style weapons in the hands of many many civilians, there will be no Holocaust of a disarmed minority if there is no monopoly. You want at least a duopoly on the use of lethal violence and yes, it is messy but there is no Utopia, and never will be. I think Samuel Butler called it Erewhon or Nowhere.
Also R.J. Rummel wrote a book, online called" Death by government" where he enumerates the 170 million deaths by government(he calls it Democide) in the 20th Century.
Lastly the FBI has stats on Homicides here:
In those stats it will have numbers saying 'Hands and feet' kill more people than 'Rifles.' So why the emphasis on rifles? This recent massacre is the acme of dramatic heartrending grief, however a mere blip statistically. It is mendacious to use drama to force policy decisions.
Very disturbing at how weak the republican party or individual party members seem to be on this and many other issues. In fact, so few in that party seem to even have a spine much less enough gray matter for the job, it's no wonder we're being subjected to all the nonsense going on in dismantling our culture and way of life. It may indeed be time for more profound changes.
Unlike the liberal democRAT party and the Obama regime, the NRA membership is comprised of the most personally responsible and construction ally committed people in America. NRA members are the kind of people America needs tp preserve the republic. The liberal media, the democRATS and Obama intend to turn us all into subjects of the government, like in Russia, China, And the Islamic world.
Go NRA
Fascinating article, Bruce. Have you written a book on this?
"Self preservation is the natural inclination of all living things. The presumption that it can be granted or denied will always be met with resistance; except, of course, by the suicidal."
I imply, you infer. Z S Grantham
"The facts are objective"
Yes, but that depends on your definition of a fact.
All too often someone's interpretation of evidence (the fact) is taken as fact. That's just wrong.
According to your own 2nd amendment, there is no absolute right for individuals to possess and carry guns, nothwithstanding the machinations of the dickless wonders from the NRA.
The U.S. has become a mass of fearful, paranoid red-necks and it is ugly!
It's not the NRA that is winning the the debate it's the constitution that is winning. With freedom comes risk the only alternitive is to lock down society to the point where no one is free. You can not regulate crazy, if we trade liberty for security we will have niether
im not old and i have a hard time reading your image text
Fed. paper 1 paragraph 2 line 1 Beware the Gov't will create a crisis, then tell you. you need to give up a part of your freedom so they can solve it.
NRA = Winning
Gun-grabbing Leftists = Fail
Gun grabbers have very little visible support.
Please call and urge your Congressman and Senators to oppose all Anti-gun legislation.
Tell your Congressman and Senators that you will be watching their vote on this issue, tell them "You could never support anyone who voted to restrict our gun rights in any way." tell them. "That this issue is your top priority" urge them to "Vote against any Anti-gun bill."
Gun grabbers have very little visible support.
Please call and urge your Congressman and Senators to oppose all Anti-gun legislation.
Tell your Congressman and Senators that you will be watching their vote on this issue, tell them "You could never support anyone who voted to restrict our gun rights in any way." tell them. "That this issue is your top priority" urge them to "Vote against any Anti-gun bill."
A Response To Crime
Bulletproof glass doesn't cause crime; it's a response to crime. Guns owned by citizens are not the cause of crime, they are a response to crime. The actions of a tyrannical American president are unconstitutional. They are a crime. The response to this disregard for law and will be proclaimed under the banner of "The Conservative Party for Democracy". The mission of this new party will be to respond daily and hourly to each hammer blow to the Statue of liberty, to the faces of the presidents on Mount Rushmore. Next to theses great American leaders, Obama is a mouse. I propose we build a Mouse Hotel where Obama goes in but does not come out. Our ship of state takes time to respond to shelling by enemies like Obama but in the end he will be handed the bill by the waiter. The waiter is the center mass of American public opinion.
It's honestly pretty amusing that the NRA does so well given that they act like jackasses. But then again, there's no jackass quite like a rich, well connected gun-control hypocrite who surrounds himself with armed bodyguards while telling the commoners that they're not important enough to be allowed the same. Plus the American people, as foolish as they may be, are still observent enough to notice that nearly every every gun-control advocate hails from a failed leftist death-spiral state with excessive taxes, oppressive regulation, and enormous debt.
The real news is how the Republicans have once again made themselves completely irrelevant. The NRA at least stands for something and isn't afraid to put skin in the game, best I can tell all the GOP establishment cares about is putting flags on the map just for the sake of having flags on the map. Why support an organization that no longer looks out for my interests?
Crime control not gun control.
Restrict criminals not law abiding citizens.
Some idiot commented how the First Amendment's protections do not stop us from passing, and enforcing, laws about libel and slander and shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. There is no reason why they should not be able to restrict access to guns and gun accessories.
I pointed out that we ALREADY have all the equivalent laws on guns, and more so. His argument is a specious analogy — he's claiming that, because someone might libel someone else with a printer, that we shouldn't let people have printers. He's arguing that, since someone might steal my printer, and commit libel with it, that I shouldn't be able to have a printer. That's just bovine excreta.
All the laws in the world won't stop an evil person from doing evil — not for a moment. I can name at least three means by which I could create at least as much death, horror, and dismay as (jerkoff) did at Sandy Hook, not a one requires a gun at all. Allow me to equip my hypothetical perp with a crossbow, and the body/horror count goes up.
No, the only defense against wolves is sheepdogs. Taking the teeth and claws away from the sheepdogs only leaves the sheep more helpless, not less. Because the wolves are not going to be defanged or declawed by The Law. That's why they ARE wolves — they don't care about The Law.
And if the Federal government cannot interdict access to marijuana to any substantial effect, how can the Federal government interdict access to guns, which could be manufactured quite effectively with 1880s technology — and now with 2010′s technology in virtually any garage?
Q.E.D. — No, you will NOT defang/declaw the wolves of the world. You will only defang/declaw the sheepdogs.
The merits of the two respective arguments couldn't possibly have any effect on the outcome of the debate. No, America is too far gone for that. Whoever has the most expensive, best organized propaganda campaign will win.
Maybe this is true. I don't know for sure. It certainly seems to be true as far as such issues as GMO labeling. We'll see. Maybe it is all about peddling propaganda.
It's amazing how dishonest our 'media' is today. Obama is pimping dead children to push forward his failed ideology, and his lapdogs in the media march lock-step. No wonder nobody trusts them any more.
Enforce the laws that are already on the books.
One only has to look at "gun free" zones and cities to understand the folly of them, ChiCONGO is a perfect example of the utopia (for criminals) created by so called gun free areas.
So why is Forbes magazine, a business journal of the top 1%, involving itself in the debate for more reasonable gun controls? The reason must be all those ads from Beretta Firearms. The weapons industry is experience tremendous growth now with so much fear, myth, superstition, and anger. Obviously, Forbes does not want to pass on those profitable gun ads.
The only thing "promoting" growth in gun sales right now, is Obama and his insistence that we not be able to buy a rifle if it "looks" bad! And then there is the "universal gun registration" that everyone thinks is going to solve ALL our problems. Do you really think the gang-bangers are going to register the guns they buy from the trunk of a car? Do you think you are safer because I put my name on a piece of paper? If you want to save lives, get rid of those STUPID "gun-free zone" signs. Who on earth thought that was going to help anything? If it was going to help, why don't all you anti-gun people put that sign on your front lawn?
Let the Butcher of Benghazi campaign begin ! Anything to avoid working on the Booming Economy and Focusing like a laser on Job Creation ? Nothing but a Buffoon in Office ! LMFAO
Obama reported to be dismissing military leaders who will not fire on civilians if ordered.
Its not too late to remove him from office, like they should have done to Hitler.
1.I gave my full support to President for gun control. Give me please one example why we need AR-15 or any other assault weapons, in everyday life???
2. In December 2011, I had a huge disagreement, talking with Republicans on street, in Old Town Alexandria, VA 22314, about: " Should student with gun permit be allowed to carry gun on Campus"??? Law in VA said: if you are over 18. years old and you have gun permit, you should be aloud to carry gun everywhere??? 1) All Campus should have security. Students go on Collage to study. There is NO one reason for them to carry gun on Campus . If young people want to carry gun, they should go to military or Law Enforcement… 2) As I know , is NOT that difficult to get Gun Permit in Virginia : take a class, go with instructor on ranch to shoot a gun, and apply for gun permit…
Federal Gov. and Attorney General should bring Law: NO guns on Campus in ALL States.
Why do you need the right to be able to speak your anti-gun mind? You don't need to….but with the First Admendment you have every right. With the 2nd Amendment , I have the right to keep and bare arms. I don't "need" to give you a reason. I do not have to show a need anymore than you do to exercise your rights. By the way, an AR-15 is just like a revolver….one pull, one shot. It is only the packaging that gets all you guys bent out of shape!
Hey, if Michelle has the "right to bare arms" which is evident by the dresses she wears, we to should have the "right to bare arms"! Don't ya' think?
They will let you know as soon as their favorite show, American Idol, is over! Meanwhile, "One flew over the cuckoo's nest is now playing at the White House!!
This is much bigger than the NRA; there are 80 million gun owners in America, who are now the safest-to-hate minority of all. I'm seeing a grassroots movement, driven by concerns over whether we get to keep the right to self-defense, or have the tattered shreds of that right taken away. If we're not allowed to defend ourselves, our right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is at risk. If all must submit to "mental health testing", can a diagnosis of "Oppositional Defiant Disorder" and mandatory "treatment" for all dissidents be far behind?
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this.
The term "Well Regulated" in the Second Amendment meant "Well Manned and Equipped " in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time.
United States v. Miller also determined that the term " Arms" refers to "Ordinary Military Weapons" (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.
The 2008 Heller v. Washington DC decision reaffirmed that the Right to Bear Arms was an Individual right. The 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision reaffirmed it yet again and made it clear that it applies to every state, every city and every town in the United States.
To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to the 18th century Printing Press.
Liberty is worth the risk of death!
Taking away our 2nd amendment rite.How can a man be president of the UNITED STATES,when he was not even born hear,a TRUE AMERICAN? You are no president of mine,go back to your own country and take that Feinstein with you, it's about time she retired,about 50yrs.ago. As knowledgeable as she feels she is (NOT),she lacks one thing COMMON SENSE. Lets ban GRENADE and ROCKET LAUNCHERS from rifles. Just when you thought stupidity only goes so far,and then you have Feinstein (WICKED WITCH OF THE WEST).Help us Dorthy and Toto get rid of the WICKED WITCH……..GOD BLESS THE N.R.A
The answer to gun control is the same answer as controls placed on vehicle ownership and driving.
To own a car it must be registered, licensed, inspected and insured.
To drive a car the driver must be trained, tested and licensed.
A car is designed to transport people or materials from place to place and society found that the vehicle must be regulated to reduce property damage and deaths as well as compensate victims.
A gun is designed to kill animals or people. The same registration, licensing, inspection and insurance should be required for ownership or operation.
Persons shooting a gun should be trained, tested, and licensed to shoot a gun. If the person has committed a crime, or has other reasons he should not be granted a license to shoot or own a gun the license should be withheld. The same way a person driver's license is revoked and the person not allowed to drive.
Local DMV offices could be equipped for gun license and registration utilizing weekends when the buildings are underutilized. Gun registration would include test fire and hammer imprint data as well as serial number and gun photo.
Owners not qualified to own gun would be give opportunity to sell gun to a licensed gun owner.
Gun owners would be required to purchase insurance in case of gun caused property or personal injury by the gun regardless of operator the same way cars are handled.
After the registration period any person found in possession of a gun without a proper license would be committing a crime just like a person driving a car that is not registered, licensed and insured.
The Gun grabbers really don't have a leg to stand on.
All I have herd from them is not how to protect kids or deal with Gang violence, but how to punish Law Biding Americans that would never commit a crime to begin with. Then they laugh at real solutions like armed guards in schools, which some places have had for a long time. Besides it is very hard for me to stop from rolling my eyes when some Abortion activist gets on TV and tells me they want to protect the kids….
Read the statistic and facts about guns and gun control. Gun control produces more crime! More gun and less gun control has a negative effect on crime. Go to the website listed above for statistical facts based on factual research, not hearsay and emotional responses.
I wish more politicians would do some research and fact checking instead of shooting their mouths off without having any facts to back it up!
"all we are saying, is give peace a chance" ya, know the gun we hold in our hands to fend off the thugs that enter our homes and try to kill of for our 52″ TV? Or the govt when it enters into the stage of tyranny? Give piece a chance, the gun in your hand is sometimes referred to as a piece!! Without this piece to protect ourselves, we will end up like the Jew's in FEMA camps. They are already waiting for us, 72 of them last time I counted. 2 billion hollow point bullets, 2,700 armored tanks, 7,000 assault rifles, and they want us to give up our piece? Now way, take it from my cold dead fingers!!
gobbly gook, keep your guns, "no infringements"
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this.
The term "Well Regulated" in the Second Amendment meant "Well Manned and Equipped " in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time.
United States v. Miller also determined that the term " Arms" refers to "Ordinary Military Weapons" (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.
The 2008 Heller v. Washington DC decision reaffirmed that the Right to Bear Arms was an Individual right. The 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision reaffirmed it yet again and made it clear that it applies to every state, every city and every town in the United States.
To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to writings in quill pens.
Liberty is worth the risk of death!
Are most republicans sitting on the side lines while only a few argue about our 2nd amendment, when are americans going to get their heads out of the sand while a few are in the biggest fight of american history.Over the past century their has never been a war fought on us soil, outside of the early wars, do to the fact that most americans from new york to california and all along the border states of mexico own guns. Are we going to let the president turn us into a 3rd world country, for the fact that he is cutting all funds of educational when that is one of the most important things in the world. Education, healthcare and the military should be the three main objectives in the U.S. All americans better wake up and realize what this government has done to the U.S. So i urge you to take the lead jeff flake to stand up for the united states.
Thank you from a native arizonian
The NRA's advocacy is now becoming dangerous to the world, as it has been for American society for a long time. The adrenalin fuelled energy of those wielding weapons can only be countered at times such as this where humanity finds its voice – ACT NOW. Almost 99% of Americans who are not NRA members should not be influenced by the clearly biased 'policies' proposed by this group. The disproportionately large influence wielded by this group requires that action be taken to moderate them or even entirely deny them a voice in matters where their interests run contrary to that of society, such as school safety. The denial of this loud and stultifying voice is necessary to ensure responsible citizens' freedom of expression.
I DO NOT AGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU ARE COMMENTING ON PUT THE TRIAL JUDGE ASIDE AND ACT LIKE AN AVERAGE PERSON!!INFLUENCE PEOPLE THAT ARE NON MEMBERS,PLEASE.I AM PROUD TO SAY I AM AN N.R.A MEMBER,GOD BLESS THEM IT'S GOOD TO KNOW SOMEONE IS STANDING UP FOR OUR RITES,CONSTITUTION 2nd AMENDMENT,WITH OUT THEM WE WOULD BE STUCK WITH THE GOVERNMENT(WORTHLESS),AND A NON AMERICAN BORN PRESIDENT,BEAUTIFUL WITH THEM WE ARE ALL DOOMED. WE ARE AMERICANS WE ARE FREE BORN FREE WE DON'T NEED A GOVERNMENT TO MAKE US FREE, WE ARE ALREADY FREE,FREE,FREE,FREE,FREE…..
Gun rights advocates like the NRA may still be winning the influence battle over gun control (thank goodness), but as long as the DHS is purchasing a century's worth of ammunition and clearing the market of any left-overs, the gun control camp might as well be writing all the second amendment nullifications that they want–at least as long as Barry and his gang have control. Oh, and despite global lead demand on the rise, Barry has had the EPA put the last U. S. primary lead smelter out of business. Those in the know credit it not to the dangers that processing lead poses to the environment (there are new "safe standards" under which the company could continue to work–if it would afford to), the purpose the EPA made it so expensive for Doe Run to continue operations was to eliminate it as a supplier to the ammunition industry.
Hhmmm… They might not be rewriting gun laws, but progressives are effective nonetheless. Chalk up a win in the battle by the gun control camp.