new post
register or log in

Patrick's 40 proposals »

10,751 registered users, 9 online now: Booger, just any guy, JZ, landtof, Patrick, PockyClipsNow, Rashomon, rpanic01, Tenpoundbass

The Left Bullies the NRA

By Ironman (162/174 = 93% civil)   2012 Dec 26, 12:53am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (4)   7,255 views   62 comments   watch (0)   share   quote

On Christmas Eve, seven people were shot in the city of Chicago. The media made little mention of the shootings, since they're now routine in Chicago -- the city has seen some 500 shootings in 2012 alone. The vast majority of the shooters are black, and the vast majority of the victims are black. Many of the victims are under the age of 18: Anton Sanders, 15, shot on Jan. 20; Deshun Winfert, 15, shot on Feb. 5; Damion Rolle, 14, shot on Feb. 21; George Howard and Albert Guyton, both 15, shot on Feb. 27 and Feb. 28; the list goes on. A few are under age 10. You've never heard of any of them.

But when an evil white person with a history of mental instability shoots up a school, killing 20 children, most of whom were white, the media is suddenly concerned with gun control.

Perhaps that's because the media is racist. Or perhaps it's something else. If the media pays attention to the shootings in Chicago, it will have to talk about the fact that Chicago is heavily gun controlled. It will have to discuss the fact that guns are illegally flowing into areas of heavy gun violence. And it will have to talk about the impact of social ills like single motherhood, gang recruitment and poor public education.

Instead, the media focuses on Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine. Focusing on such statistically aberrant scenarios rather than the more widespread gun violence that plagues our cities allows the media to target one of its most hated groups: the National Rifle Association.

So what does that have to do with Chicago versus Sandy Hook? The media knows that in all shooting scenarios, the conversation quickly polarizes into two positions: ban guns or discuss other myriad social and legal issues that lead to shootings. In communities plagued by high levels of social ills like Chicago, the second position is the more obvious one. In cases of placid communities getting shot up by a nutcase, the left can talk gun bans more easily.

It's far harder to stop Sandy Hook than it is to stop violence in Chicago. But the left doesn't like the possible solutions in Chicago. They prefer to destroy their competition. So the shootings in Chicago will continue. So, in all likelihood, will incidents like Sandy Hook, thanks in large part to the left's focus on destroying its enemies rather than preventing acts of evil.


1   Kevin   2012 Dec 26, 3:44pm  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Making guns illegal in one area (or for one class of person) will never work because the guns will still be available.

If you want to prevent gun violence, try reducing the actual number of guns around. Make it actually harder for people to have guns (or at least ammo) and you'll reduce the number of guns being used to kill people.

Telling psychopath killer Bob that he can't have an M16 but Goodguy joe can isn't going to keep Bob from killing you with an M16; it's just going to ensure that the M16 he uses will be obtained from somebody else.

Adam Lanza did not use his own guns to kill those kids! It wouldn't matter if you blacklisted that asshole in every way possible. He used his mom's guns. The only thing that would have stopped him from doing it would have been if he had no option to obtain the weapons.

Australia used to have a real problem with gun violence too. Then they instituted a ban on most weapons, and actually DESTROYED a huge number of them, thus reducing how many are in circulation. As a result, gun violence dropped dramatically.

The US is the only stable, wealthy democracy where gun violence is a major problem. We also have more than twice as many guns per capita than the next closest country. To claim that this is mere coincidence is a lie.

2   121212   2012 Dec 27, 4:37am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Homeboy says

Are you really thinking this through? What's your plan, exactly? If a person is diagnosed with autism, we confiscate all guns from that person's family? How far does that go? Do we take guns away from that person's cousins? In-laws? What about their friends? And then which mental illnesses qualify for this policy? Depression? I believe approximately one out of ten people takes medication for depression. If we confiscate their guns and all the guns of their friends and family, isn't that going to be most of the population? Seems like it would make more sense to just ban guns. Otherwise, we're going to be fighting millions of lawsuits. And then there's the problem that most gun murders AREN'T committed by mentally ill people.

No offense, but your plan kind of sucks.

We could! We could endorse people licences! Make stricter rules. Such as If you get a AWDUI you have to blow into a device in NY to start your car!

We should clamp down when mental health and medication are at play with gun owners.

3   Thedaytoday   2012 Dec 27, 7:27am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Call it Crazy says

Right, because that's the firearm that causes the majority of murders....

That's very cruel.

I think the conversation should be about the fact this killer didn't need to reload and thus could not be stopped.

Cling to your gun stats , that should make your feel safer.

Gun shows laws need to be changed.

4   David Losh   2012 Dec 29, 8:39am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Kevin says

What they don't have are firearms!

Criminals don't need guns because you are a sitting duck.

All a gang member in Germany needs is a good pair of steel toed boots.

In some countries petty crime is rampant, and unreported because any person with a base ball bat can become a terrorist.

Now, if the populace is armed then yes, the criminals need to be armed. A gun is an easier weapon to use, for all size of people. That is why the Colt was called the great equalizer.

In a place like Chicago they should be allowed armed patrols, deputies if you will. These people need training, back ground checks, gun registration, and support.

I'm sorry, but we do have that right. We have the right to a Militia.

5   FortWayne (44/45 = 97% civil)   2012 Dec 26, 1:42am  ↑ like (5)   ↓ dislike (4)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Left doesn't care about solving the problem, they just want to pass some feel good legislation that will accomplish nothing other than piss people off.

6   121212   2012 Dec 26, 2:42am  ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

You cannot even say Mitt Romney is a "REAL" Conservative either.

Even John Boehner is left of the party and he is the leader of the house, for now!

Who are your conservative leaders?

7   FortWayne (44/45 = 97% civil)   2012 Dec 27, 1:09am  ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

taxee says

Soon the only people who will really need guns will be rich white republicans. Now that we've solved that problem let's move on to abortion and taxes.

If we let the left have it their way, guns will be only available to police, military, drug dealers, criminals, and some government unit that will come out to occasionally suppress the unhappy citizens who are being squeezed by governments policies.

8   Homeboy   2012 Dec 27, 4:17am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

FortWayne says

We haven't had too many incompetent presidents in this country. Carter, Nixon, Obama are the only 3 I can think of.

You are hilarious. Nobody seems to remember that Ronald Reagan's administration illegally sold arms to radical government factions and used the proceeds to support other radicals in South America, and when questioned about it, Reagan didn't seem to remember anything that was going on in his own administration. Turns out he was already suffering from the early stages of Alzheimer's. Sorry if I blew his chances for sainthood.

9   Thedaytoday   2012 Dec 27, 7:15am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Call it Crazy says

So, why ban semi-auto rifles that mentally ill people used for these handful of mass shootings? Seems the focus should be somewhere else...

yes on gun shows and banning assault rifles and large magazines

10   Thedaytoday   2012 Dec 27, 8:02am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Call it Crazy says

The conversation should be about how to stop deranged mentally ill killers from doing this again. Guns don't reload themselves....

Especially AR's that don't need to reloaded to fire 30 or 100 rounds.

11   Thedaytoday   2012 Dec 27, 8:03am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Call it Crazy says

You can cling to the stats, the guns are more useful.

Cling to your AR's.

12   Thedaytoday   2012 Dec 27, 8:03am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Call it Crazy says

Thedaytoday says

That's very cruel.

No, data is real. Sorry if these facts burst your fantasy...

You are a cruel son of a bitch

13   Kevin   2012 Dec 29, 9:44am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

You also have the right to say incredibly stupid, uninformed things.

14   Lam   2012 Dec 26, 2:32am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Which 'Left' is that? The Obama 'Left' that is actually right of Bush II?

15   121212   2012 Dec 26, 2:36am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Name one President who was a Republican who is still viewed as a modern conservative today!


16   121212   2012 Dec 26, 2:46am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

LMFAO Does that include the Right Bullying Too!

Frank Luntz, a top Republican strategist and pollster, said Wednesday that the National Rifle Association's recent calls for armed guards to be stationed at every school in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. massacre suggested the organization isn't listening to public opinion on the issue.

“The public wants guns out of the schools, not in the schools, and they're not asking for a security official or someone else," Luntz said on CBS’s “This Morning,” responding to a proposal first floated by top NRA lobbyist Wayne LaPierre during a press conference last week.

"I don’t think the NRA is listening. I don’t think that they understand," Luntz continued. "Most Americans would protect the Second Amendment rights and yet agree with the idea that not every human being should own a gun, not every gun should be available at anytime, anywhere, for anyone. That at gun shows, you should not be able to buy something there and then without any kind of check whatsoever. What they're looking for is a common-sense approach that says that those who are law-abiding should continue to have the right to own a weapon, but that you don’t believe the right should be extended to everyone at every time for every type of weapon.”

Luntz conducted a survey of gun owners both affiliated and unaffiliated with the NRA earlier this year, which found broad support for certain provisions that would restrict the sale of guns.

Among NRA members, 74 percent said they support background checks as a requirement for concealed carry permits. Recent polls of the broader American populace have showed higher levels of support for that and other gun control measures which the NRA has historically opposed.

17   Tenpoundbass (149/149 = 100% civil)   2012 Dec 26, 2:54am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Raw says

The NRA contols our politicians, they trample our constitution, they decide the laws of our land and this article has the audacity to claim we are the ones who bully them.
This is adding insult to injury.

Even if that were remotely so, then I'd watch what I say about them.

Waiting for a recanting of the fake rage...

18   Homeboy   2012 Dec 26, 3:31pm  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Why is it you liars never mention that the murder rate has gone DOWN in Chicago since they started regulating guns?

Edit: I love it when people "dislike" something that is simply a statement of fact. You dislike facts, eh?

19   taxee   2012 Dec 26, 9:37pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Soon the only people who will really need guns will be rich white republicans. Now that we've solved that problem let's move on to abortion and taxes.

20   WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch (56/56 = 100% civil)   2012 Dec 27, 3:50am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Kevin says

Making guns illegal in one area (or for one class of person) will never work because the guns will still be available.

Australia and the UK are islands. The US borders a narcostate. Banning guns will work about as well as banning marijuana. The UK and Australian murder rate is only 2 per 100k instead of 4 per 100k, and the UCR is more inclusive than the UK murder rate (don't know about Australia).

Additionally, there are many places in the USA, including large major cities, where the murder rate is 2 per 100k or less. America's high average has more to do with a few shitholes like DC, Detroit, NOLA, and Chicago (and not a few rural methhead areas like Klamath Falls, OR or just about anywhere in Mississippi). In other words, evidence that subcultures are responsible.

We can greatly reduce mass shootings by imposing restrictions on a small group of people - the mentally ill and those who live with them. Teachers and others are already mandatory reporters for abuse. There's no reason the qualified (ie Medical Professionals) can't be required by law to report on somebody's fitness for a firearm to the authorities. Or Pharmacists dial the cops when fulfilling an order for anti-Schizo drugs or SSRIs. Who then come to the house and seize the firearms of all the residents, who have 30 days to sell or store the guns outside the house.

Adam's Mother TAUGHT him how to use Firearms. I don't mean just gun safety. She took him to the range regularly. Is that stupid or what? A severely autistic kid with a myriad of mental health issues should be banned from living in a home with firearms.

Adam Lamza, Seung-Hui Cho, and Anders Brevik ALL had their mental illnesses diagnosed repeatedly by authorities. Even though VT admins were ignorant of Cho's lifelong treatment in Middle and High School, they had him diagnosed after a stalking incident and were aware of his depression and anxiety and recommended him for therapy; Cho's Mom went to her Church for help instead - but that's another rant. There are no excuses anymore. We know what causes mass shootings 90% of the time. Mentally Ill people.

Tough shit if it's discriminatory, it's an easy way to save some lives, both homicide and suicide, without taking everybody's rights away.

Watch comments by email

home   top   users   about   contact  
#investing   #housing   #politics   #humor  
housing crash   thunderdome   sexy pix   site suggestions  
best comments   ad hominem comment jail on twitter   random post  
please recommend to republicans