published Saturday, January 12th, 2013

LaPierre

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

173
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Salsa said...

Looks like more lefty hate speech.

January 12, 2013 at 12:08 a.m.
alirezat said...

Indeed.

January 12, 2013 at 12:59 a.m.
carlB said...

Salsa said... Looks like more lefty hate speech alirezat said... Indeed

--------=-Reply The people that did the killing of all the kid in all of the locations are the people who need to be hated. But now even if we have our guns under the laws, people as you two try to make it make it right and do not want to broaden the gun laws to reduce the clip capacities. Then you try to accuse other people of having hateful judgment?

January 12, 2013 at 1:23 a.m.
MasterBlaster said...

OK Clay, you've crossed a line. I hereby charge you with attempting to make little right-winged heads assplode...

January 12, 2013 at 3:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

How can anyone expect an irresponsible group in Washington D.C. to pass legislation that requires responsible and accountable gun ownership with with severe consequences for non compliance when accountability for their own non performance doesn't exist?

Why should gun ownership not have demonstrated knowledge, skill and ability requirements including back ground checks with no criminal or mental issues?

Did the second amendment intend that every citizen have the ability to be the aggressive assaulting participate in a war?

Why would gun ownership not require securing the gun by limiting access to the owner only and requiring reporting the disposition of a gun including theft?

Why should the taxes on guns not be sufficient to pay for the protection and well being of those preferring not to own a gun?

Should there be restrictions on owning tanks, grenade launchers, surface to air missiles and other war making military type arms?

It is a complex and controversial issue. What is to be done about the growing number of senile elderly with varying degrees of dementia and paranoia with an arsenal of weapons, many with carry permits?

January 12, 2013 at 4:15 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

The NRA is bad? How many polykillers have been members?

fairmon asks some good questions, or makes some worthwhile insinuations, but what's fair about taxing gun owners for nonowners? And note "free" in the 2nd amendment: to keep the country a free country, the citizens as a whole are to be able to outgun the government. When the constitution was written, private warships (privateers) were common.

January 12, 2013 at 5:48 a.m.
MTJohn said...

fairmon said...How can anyone expect an irresponsible group in Washington D.C. to pass legislation that requires responsible and accountable gun ownership with with severe consequences for non compliance when accountability for their own non performance doesn't exist?

And, why is that group so irresponsible? Because they have been bought and paid for by folks like Wayne LaPierre!

January 12, 2013 at 7:19 a.m.
fairmon said...

AndrewLohr said... The NRA is bad? How many polykillers have been members?

ans. The NRA is not bad, I could envision them playing a much bigger role in assuring responsible ownership and control.

aldrewlorh said..fairmon asks some good questions, or makes some worthwhile insinuations, but what's fair about taxing gun owners for nonowners?

ans. The same logic or, depending on perspective, the lack there of as health care. This could mean those that opt not to or not eligible to own would also be taxed for failure to own and be prepared to help keep the country free. I assume a single shot muzzle loader would exempt someone from the tax.

January 12, 2013 at 7:20 a.m.
Rebus said...

Creeping tyranny. And you left wing-nuts just too thick to see it. Or maybe not...maybe you want the Fed to control ALL aspects of your lives.

January 12, 2013 at 7:31 a.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn said...

And, why is that group so irresponsible? Because they have been bought and paid for by folks like Wayne LaPierre!

response...The list of owners and influence is long including the teachers, auto workers, public employees unions, AARP, the pharmaceutical industry, health insurers, big banks and wealthy individuals like George Soros etc. The puppets are really dancing on this issue.

January 12, 2013 at 7:35 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Creeping tyranny. And you left wing-nuts just too thick to see it. Or maybe not...maybe you want the Fed to control ALL aspects of your lives.

Evidence, please, Mr. Dennis? Of course, we will be able to fight the feds with assault rifles. After all, they control the most powerful military machine in the world.

January 12, 2013 at 7:39 a.m.
Rebus said...

Lu: Gun control for one, Lu. Politicians grandstanding on this issue. Empowering government more and more and more to punish free individuals, the overwhelming majority of whom are law-abiding, is not the answer. It’s never the answer. The anti-gun peeps may say "assault rifles", but what they mean is "all guns". You know it and I know it Lu. Like I said, it's creeping. Next you know, they will want to limit the size of your slurpeee .Oh, wait a minute.

January 12, 2013 at 7:53 a.m.
fairmon said...

Has anyone seen a logical and possible proposal that would have prevented the incident at the school? The key being logical and possible which includes being affordable. Failure to keep her guns secure and not accessible by anyone other than her cost the woman her life and the lives of 20 children and 6 adults plus one nut, her son. Does this suggest responsible and accountable ownership should be included if there is federal legislation forthcoming?

January 12, 2013 at 7:53 a.m.
tifosi said...

Spot on Clay Bennett!!! Change is coming.

January 12, 2013 at 7:56 a.m.
Rebus said...

yeah, change is needed tifosi. But what change? At what cost?

January 12, 2013 at 7:58 a.m.
tifosi said...

All I ask is that the NRA launch a national campaign to educate gun owners on the proper measures for securing firearm. If they would take 1/10th of what they spend on lobbyists and spend it on educating gun owners, then a lot of pressure on them would be relieved. Too many children are dying because of reckless and irresponsible gun owners that do not properly secure their firearms. Ask any soldier what happens when they do not properly secure a firearm. They are punished. How many more children must die at the hands of reckless gun owners???

Brennan Nowell was able to hold on for nearly five hours after a bullet pierced his 31-pound body just before Christmas, according to a Hamilton County Medical Examiner's Office autopsy report released Wednesday.

The bullet flew at an angle through the front of the 2-year-old's chest, entering just below his right breast and exiting from his upper left breast, the report states.

Brennan was taken to T.C. Thompson Children's Hospital at Erlanger, where he later died. The probable cause of death was the gunshot wound, according to the report.

The report also releases new details of how the shooting happened at the Harrison home of Brennan's grandparents, Stan and Janet Nowell.

On the night of Dec. 20, Brennan's grandfather left a .40-caliber semi-automatic pistol on a chair in the family's house on River Stream Drive, according to the report. Brennan grabbed the gun and accidentally shot himself.

"He was a beautiful boy that leaves behind countless people who loved him and nurtured him," his obituary reads. "We will always be blessed for what time we had with him and will pray for the day that we get to see him again."

January 12, 2013 at 8:11 a.m.
fairmon said...

The second amendment addressed the conditions of America at the time which was a government without major resources to respond to external threats and without state and local police to deal with vigilantes therefore the possible need for a militia of citizens.

The second amendment states: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Some, not all owners including me, like to emphasize the right to bear arms while ignoring the well regulated statement introducing the amendment.

January 12, 2013 at 8:12 a.m.
Rebus said...

and some fairmon, like to ignore the "shall not be infringed".

January 12, 2013 at 8:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

Rebus said... and some fairmon, like to ignore the "shall not be infringed".

Yes, that is why the amendment should be considered in it's entirity. Reasonable regulation that protects other citizens should not be viewed as infringement.

January 12, 2013 at 8:42 a.m.
MTJohn said...

fairmon said...Some, not all owners including me, like to emphasize the right to bear arms while ignoring the well regulated statement introducing the amendment.

And, to be truthful, the debate is really just about how we define "well regulated" and not really about the right to bear arms.

However, there is one important footnote. Well regulated has important bottom line considerations for an industry that has made large profits selling arms to an unregulated militia. Follow the money. Wayne LaPierre is the mouthpiece for the money, not for the average NRA member even though the average NRA member thinks otherwise.

January 12, 2013 at 8:44 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Jack Dennis, as a gun owner I am not concerned about the limits on magazines for semi automatics, nor the registration of guns, background checks, etc. The difference between you and me is that I am not paranoid. Paranoia perhaps should be one disqualification for gun ownership, perhaps?

January 12, 2013 at 8:53 a.m.
conservative said...

No surprise here. The Liberal loontoonist would go so far as to arrest a person for their opinion if it differed with his. I would bet a coke that the loontoonist would hypocritically say that he supports free speech.

January 12, 2013 at 8:55 a.m.
Rebus said...

Lu, Name one thing I've said that reeks of paranoia. I'm not against all gun control...just aware of the potential slippery slope. It isn't a myth. Why are you so quick to flame me?

January 12, 2013 at 9 a.m.
timbo said...

***FREUDIAN SLIP ALERT**

WELL, WHAT DO YOU KNOW, BENNETT AND THE REST OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS HAVE BEEN OUTED. WHAT DOES THIS PICTURE SHOW? A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL ARRESTING A LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN. WHY? BECAUSE HE HAD THE AUDACITY TO USE HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND HIS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT WHICH READS "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." This is not subject to interpretation and couldn't be clearer.

THIS COULDN'T BE MORE REVEALING IF A CONSERVATIVE HAD PAID THAT IDIOT BENNETT TO DRAW IT FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THIS IS JUST WHAT YOU NATIONAL SOCIALISTS WANT, AND WHAT WE FEAR. THE GOVERNMENT TAKING AWAY OUR MOST IMPORTANT RIGHTS! THAT IS WHY WE NEED WEAPONS TO ASSURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

This just shows how dumb Bennett and the rest of you liberals are. I couldn't have drawn a more informative cartoon my self. This is what is called a "FREUDIAN SLIP".

Now go ahead, bluster, use your childish tactic of telling us that "we don't want your guns" we just want you to be "sensible." Then you can call me names and get a rotary cuff injury patting yourselves on the back about how "smart" you are but the fact remains that Bennett just revealed by accident what your real intentions are.

So go ahead and write a million pithy, insulting posts but you can't get away from this Freudian slip. Now knock yourselves out!!!

THANK YOU BENNETT, ...YOU BLITHERING, CHILDISH IDIOT.

January 12, 2013 at 9:13 a.m.
Rebus said...

timbo on the money. your papers, pliz!

January 12, 2013 at 9:16 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Jack Dennis, you posted: "Creeping tyranny" and could not provide any evidence. I call that paranoia.

January 12, 2013 at 9:21 a.m.
timbo said...

For you English majors the 2nd Amendment reads, ""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."

As you notice there is a comma between these two statements. Here is the definition of a comma:

  1. Grammar A punctuation mark ( , ) used to indicate a separation of ideas or of elements within the structure of a sentence.
  2. A pause or separation; a caesura.
  3. Any of several butterflies of the genus Polygonia, having wings with brownish coloring and irregularly notched edges.

So let's see...Hmmmm...It is not a butterfly....but it is used to indicate a separation. Since the founders were sticklers for punctuation and grammar I would think that they meant for this to be too separate thoughts. The reason it is in the same sentence is that the "well regulated militia" at the time was made up with individual gun owners. There is no real confusion here. It has been confused because liberals want government control and to do that they have to "change" the meaning of the constitution and Bill of Rights.

Ignoring rules of grammar isn't a big surprise for liberals since they ignore the Bill of Rights.

I know..I am guilty again of using something you emotional liberal imbeciles know nothing about, LOGIC. OOPS!...I forgot the comma between "emotional" and "liberal"... Maybe that is one thought..

January 12, 2013 at 9:29 a.m.
timbo said...

Ikithlu...Paranoia?? Then your hero Bennett does a cartoon that emphasizes everything we conservatives are worried about and have been saying. ARE YOU REALLY, REALLY THAT STUPID? HOW DUMB ARE YOU LIBERALS? This is really funny.

Please...write some more stupid crap..I am a little bored this morning.

January 12, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.
timbo said...

HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO BET THAT THIS CARTOON DOESN'T STAY UP LONG?

January 12, 2013 at 9:38 a.m.
patriot1 said...

That oath "support and denfend the constitution against all enemies"....it seems to me politicans should be looking for ways to defend that document instead of searching for ways to get around it. There is a means by which the constitution can be ammended, why not use it instead of executive orders and knee jerk legislative action?

January 12, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.
dude_abides said...

timbo, you need to eat some of those M&M's with the numbers on 'em, bro. Listen, we don't want your guns. We just want the trigger mechanisms. Hey, where can a citizen find reasonably priced, flat black helicopter paint?

January 12, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
Maximus said...

From my 5,500 square foot gated golf community home, in backward, ignorant, no state income tax, Red State Tennessee. As I so wisely predicted in responding to another one of Clay's anti-second ammendment doodles shortly after Sandy Hook....Obama will not do the relatively cheap, simple, right and prompt thing in responding to the school shooting issue, simply advise the states to begin the hiring process to place a well trained, armed Resource Officer, State Trooper, or Police Officer in every public school in the United States. Before you wack job Obama leftists start responding with bla bla, that didn't stop the shooters at Columbine....bla, bla, guns aren't the answer...bla, bla.....resource officers won't solve the problem...think about this, had the guns not arrived at the peaceful, gun free, Sandy Hook School in Connecticut, a state by the way with very strict gun laws, schizo Adam Lanza's killing spree would have continued. Also, it is well established that schools with professional, well trained, armed Resource Officers have less bullying, less contraband (drugs, tobacco, etc.) brought into the schools, and fewer student/teacher abuse incidents. Placing armed officers in the schools will not stop the school shootings but this simple, effective, action will greatly reduce the events and will be vastly more effective than the feds placing restrictions on certain firearms and infringing upon our Second Ammendment rights. But no, Obama had to form a TASK FORCE in order to pass the buck and project his kingly power. To date, Joe Biden and his task force has made a lot of verbal threats but has accomplished nothing other than sending a clear message to all drugged up or mentally ill potential mass murderers that their access to some weapons and ammo might be curtailed. Nice job Gangster Joe, I'm glad I loaded up on Smith and Wesson stock shortly after the Sandy Hook Shootings. As a self-reliant, free market, capitalist, I made a killing on the stock $$$$$$$! Finally, as Supreme Court Justice Elana Kagen stated in her appointment hearings when asked about the Second Ammendment...."The Second Ammendment is settled law." Not bad coming from one of Barry's mega lib supreme court appointees.

January 12, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
tifosi said...

Another responsible gun owner strikes!

A 10-year old girl, Aaliyah Boyer, was setting off fireworks for New Year's in Elkton, Maryland, when she was shot through the top of her head by a bullet from celebratory gunfire.

She eventually died from her wound.

January 12, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.
tifosi said...

And they just keep coming!

Bennettsville Police were called to a home on Fayetteville Avenue, December 30, for an eight year boy who was shot. LT. Larry Turner said the child was accidentally by a family member. The child was taken by ambulance to Marlboro Park Hospital where he was later pronounced dead. Marlboro County Coroner Tim Brown, identified the child as Easton Brudger, from Clio. He said Brudger was visiting his father in Bennettsville. He died from a single gunshot wound to the abdomen. No charges have been filed yet by the Bennettsville Police Department and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division. The investigation continues.

January 12, 2013 at 10:05 a.m.
Maximus said...

Clay, I think a doddle with the head of the ACLU being tazed would be awesome! Now that's funny I don't care what anybody says.

January 12, 2013 at 10:06 a.m.
tifosi said...

Hmmm maybe we should take a closer look at how guns are sold/traded in America. Somehow they just keep winding up in the wrong hands.

A 14-year old boy in Holland, Pennsylvania, threatened to bring guns and knives to school to kill students and teachers, at Council Rock High School South. When police searched his home, they found handguns in the plain site in his room. His parents were also arrested in the case, in part due to drugs and other weapons charges.

January 12, 2013 at 10:07 a.m.
tifosi said...

No charges??? The NRA at work.

A 3-year old boy was visiting a home in Guthrie, Oklahoma, when he found a loaded, unsecured gun in the bedroom. He handled the gun and then unintentionally shot himself in the head, dying from the wound.

No charges will be filed.

January 12, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.
conservative said...

Keep the hysteria going Liberals. The gun makers are laughing at you all the way to the bank.

Ruger 10/22 Magazine Update - Jan 4, 2013 Not Accepting Any More Back Orders... At Least for Now.

Within a span of just a few days, predicted deliveries from 10/22 magazine makers have gone from reasonable estimated dates for current orders, to longer estimated dates for new orders, to blue sky estimates of 4 or more months out for any orders newer yet. We decided its time to stop accepting back orders until more mags start coming in.

All 10/22 Magazines Are Now on Back Order- We have hundreds and hundreds on order with manufacturers with some shipments that SHOULD arrive in reasonable time to fill our existing back orders... Whenever more magazines arrive after that, we'll do an emailing to announce their availability for purchase.

Prices - Our first priority is to get the magazines for our customers no matter what the cost. No supplier has over-charged us but, we aren't getting any bargains either... Everything we're ordering now costs us more than we used to pay. And so some of our prices have had to go up but we're trying to hold the line at suggested retail or less.

Thank You for Your Patience- Production and supply lines are stretched to the limit by this current high demand for 10/22 magazines. Everyone is doing their best to produce and fill as many orders as can be done in the 24 hours of each day. Thank you so much for your patience... Good Lord willing, we'll all get through this present darkness in His good time! - Sincerely, Eben Brown, E. Arthur Brown Company, Inc.

http://www.eabco.com/102202.html

January 12, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.
tifosi said...

I guess the NRA needs to start training 2 year olds on gun safety. Parents sure missed the class.

"Authorities say a 2-year-old boy died on Christmas Day after he grabbed a loaded gun left on a table in a home in Conway and shot himself."

January 12, 2013 at 10:09 a.m.
tifosi said...

He's quack alright. One with a carry permit too!

A 12-year old boy, Kolton McKinney, and a friend went to see "The Hobbit" in a theater in Tillamook, Oregon, along with three busloads of 7th graders. When Kolton lowered his movie seat, though, he found a loaded 9mm semi-auto handgun with the safety off.

Authorities were notified. The owner of the gun, Gary Quackenbush, 61, eventually showed up to look for his missing gun, thinking it would be in the lost-and-found box. Quackenbush has a conceal carry permit.

UPDATE (12/27/12): The owner of the gun is not only a conceal carry permit holder, but also a licensed gun dealer. He doesn't understand why he is being considered a "bad guy" for his irresponsibility.

January 12, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.
tifosi said...

Rest in peace sweet souls.

Charlotte Bacon, 6 Daniel Barden, 7 Rachel Davino, 29 Olivia Engel, 6 Josephine Gay, 7 Ana M Marquez-Greene, 6 Dylan Hockley, 6 Dawn Hochsprung, 47 Madeline F. Hsu, 6 Catherine V. Hubbard, 6 Chase Kowalski, 7 Jesse Lewis, 6 James Mattioli, 6 Grace McDonnell, 7 Anne Marie Murphy, 52 Emilie Parker, 6 Jack Pinto, 6 Noah Pozner, 6 Caroline Previdi, 6 Jessica Rekos, 6 Avielle Richman, 6 Lauren Rousseau, 30 Mary Sherlach, 56 Victoria Soto, 27 Benjamin Wheeler, 6 Allison N Wyatt, 6

January 12, 2013 at 10:13 a.m.
tifosi said...

Probation??? This was manslaughter. Can't protect society with that.

A Minnesota father left a gun loaded and accessible for his 9 year old to find last August. His 2 year old son was shot and injured as a result. Now he has received a probation sentence for allowing access to a gun to his child.

January 12, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.
tifosi said...

A 5-year old girl was in her home in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, playing with her father's loaded, unsecured Glock semi-auto handgun. Her two younger siblings, ages 2 and 3, were there as well. That's when she discharged the gun, shooting through the bottom of her foot and out at her big toe.

The 27-year old father works as a security guard.

The girl is being treated for the wound and will not lose her toe.

January 12, 2013 at 10:15 a.m.
tifosi said...

Every gun in the hands of a child must first pass through the hands of an adult.

January 12, 2013 at 10:16 a.m.
greshambrown said...

So, being a member of the NRA is an arrestable offense?

January 12, 2013 at 10:21 a.m.
Maximus said...

tifosi....READ IT AND WEEP....THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Canada or some other God forsaken socialist utopia is calling your name....."Confiscate all the guns immediately! It makes it easier to put them in the railroad cars." Adolph Hitler

January 12, 2013 at 10:22 a.m.
greshambrown said...

Chattanooga TN.16 year old female child has an abortion.

January 12, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

10,000 AMERICANS SHOT TO DEATH EVERY YEAR

January 12, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.
dude_abides said...

greshambrown said... "Chattanooga TN.16 year old female child has an abortion."

gresham... was this your wife? Just trying to understand.

January 12, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.
tifosi said...

Maximus: I think I will stay right here and support the U.S. Constitution that I took an oath three times to defend. I will use all means necessary under our legislative process to make sure that gun owners will not perversely interpret the 2nd Amendment. The NRA has had every chance to be proactive. Now they will succumb to the will of Americans and the laws that protect society and our children. Change is coming. You won't like it. And, the U.S. Constitution will support it.

That's how we roll.

January 12, 2013 at 10:32 a.m.
Sailorman said...

They certainly do "just keep comin" - from todays paper

"Two Chattanooga men have been charged with attempted first-degree murder after police say they tied up a family member with duct tape, threw boiling water on him and beat him with a baseball bat."

What should be outlawed? Duct tape? Boiling water? Baseball bat (part of a class of assault weapons used in over 700 deaths last year)?

But those things weren't designed to kill, maim, or multitate thousands with a single squeeze of trigger on an "assault weapon" that should "only be in the hands of the police and military" used to protect the elite of our fine country, unloading thousands of rounds of armor piercing cop killer bullets loaded into "high capacity assault clips" purchased over the internet with no sort of check at all or, worse, at a gun show by somebody who couldn't pass a background check. Heck, I only bought a LAWS cuz he was out of Hellfires and the nuke warhead was MIRV'd and too heavy to carry out of the show over my shoulder.

I probably missed a few of the rallying cries but it's difficult to keep up with the inventiveness of the gun grabbers.

Biden isn't doing a very good job of convincing me he's interested in anything but taking the assault weapon du jour away. But then he doesn't have to worry about convincing me does he? I'm just an average law-abiding gun owner who's weapons have never hurt anybody (except when I dropped a barreled action on my toe - that really hurt).

I'll believe it's about the children or reducing deaths when the pols start going after the leading causes and stop being two-faced liars. None of us will live that long.

January 12, 2013 at 10:35 a.m.
tifosi said...

Reckless gun owners that do not secure their firearms are the real problem.

January 12, 2013 at 10:38 a.m.
jesse said...

Someone needs to clue Clay in on the fact that the reason something becomes a cliche is because its TRUE!!

January 12, 2013 at 10:38 a.m.
timbo said...

tifosi.....which anti-gun organization are you whoring for? Emotional and illogical like most liberals. Would you idiots like me to list the no. 1 cause of death in the world? It is even involved in half of gun related deaths. That is ALCOHOL.

By you liberals logic, we could stop 1/2 of all gun deaths and another 20,000 traffic deaths, not to mention the thousands of lives destroyed by drinking. Why don't you "rights killers" make that illegal?

Oh, that's right. It was already tried and failed.

I think alcohol is the most destructive thing in human history but I am not for banning it any more than I am guns. So stop using the flawed statistics and emotional appeals. Let the adults make these decisions.

January 12, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.
tifosi said...

I'm not for banning guns. I'm for PUT A F..KING LOCK ON IT YOU IDIOTS!!!

January 12, 2013 at 10:52 a.m.
EaTn said...

Just now opened this toon and cracked-up laughing---has to be one of Clay's finest. The only thing missing that I can see is a gag to keep the dude from spewing out gibberish. Saw on the news this morning that at least one school is considering arming the janitors, which makes about as much sense as arming the teachers.

January 12, 2013 at 11:14 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Faculty Lounge at LaPierre Middle School:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h5auYAwoiw

January 12, 2013 at 11:37 a.m.
conservative said...

EaTn, You need to catch up.

Bill Clinton proposed "Cops in Schools" when he was president.

Many school districts all around the country already have armed officials.

A sample:

PEORIA — "Peoria School District 150 and other area school districts are way ahead of Wayne LaPierre, the National Rifle Association vice president who called for armed police officers in every school in the country."

"The district's 22 officers, all armed, are employees of District 150, a situation uncommon in Illinois schools, according to District 150 spokesman Chris Coplan."

'"We're unique in that they're our employees," Coplan said, "but we're not unique in having armed officers at our schools."'

"An Illinois Appellate Court concurred with District 150 attorneys' description of Peoria's public school district as the "only school district in the state that maintains its own police force."'

http://www.pjstar.com/news/x459329556/Local-school-districts-already-have-armed-officers

January 12, 2013 at 11:38 a.m.
hambone said...

Why not arm the students? That would sell a lot more guns than just arming the teachers.

After all that's what the NRA wants!

January 12, 2013 at 11:42 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

timbo, did I say that Bennett's cartoon represented reality? It's a cartoon, for pity's sake. It is astounding just how crazy you guys sound. NO ONE IS TAKING AWAY YOUR FIREARMS. No one is suggesting this. But to regulate, register, and trace firearms makes sense. We do it with cars. If the NRA was teaching its members thoroughly, maybe, just maybe, that CT shooter's mom a) wouldn't have owned a high capacity assault weapon b) would not have taught her disturbed son how to shoot c) would not have filled his head with just the kind of anti-government paranoia you guys display here and d) might not have left her weapons unsecured. I can think of 26 families that would have preferred that chain of circumstances had been broken.

January 12, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.
fairmon said...

It is strange that anyone intent on gun ownership objects to being responsible for the safe keeping of the gun and being accountable for it. Legislatures need to quit trying to be "input" or "how to" managers, instead describe the desired "product" and the severe consequences of deviations that produce anything other than the desired product.

January 12, 2013 at 11:47 a.m.
Maximus said...

I think Barry is off his I Am Going To Rule And Tranform America game. Isn't this the perfect time to expand the Department Of Homeland Security and place a Fed in every public school in America? Maybe that's the plan but Barry and Biden had to get "input" before doing what they want to do. And Tifosi....change ain't comin to Tennessee any time soon. I would guess that you are another wacked out Vietnam Vet war, Jane Fonda, give peace a chance, on the government dole, victim. Another example see Chuck Hagel. From the AP: "Tennessee leads the nation in gun purchases for the month of December." Delightful! Gun control means being able to hit your target.

January 12, 2013 at 12:01 p.m.
Maximus said...

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elana "Butch" Kagen: "The Second Ammendment is settled law."

January 12, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.
tifosi said...

If a gun owner fails to properly secure a firearm and it is taken by someone else and used to commit a crime/suicide/accidents, then the gun owner should face a stiff prison sentence. Civil and criminal prosecution to the full extent of the law will change habits.

That does not infringe on the 2nd Amendment.

January 12, 2013 at 12:07 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

The message appears to be that armed citizens are bad and an armed government is good.

Never mind the FACT that more US citizens have died at the hands of or due to the decisions of our own government than will ever be killed by citizens acting independently. It is time to have a discussion about the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment, to give citizens the means to protect themselves in the event that their government goes out of control. If you were to make a map of the world that highlights every country/region where government disarmed their citizens and then later presided over mass killing you would be given a real wake-up call.

Do you think you know what the political landscape will look like in this country in 50 years? In 100 years? Have you not heard "progressives" suggesting that the US Constitution is outdated and that China is a good model for economic development? Isn't it weird that someone would even dare hold China up as an example in light of their ongoing civil rights atrocities?

The world is changing very fast. Washington is turning out over 200 pages of laws, rules and regulations for us to obey every working day. We have been conditioned to except lies from politicians as a normal part of governance. Our government is recklessly accumulating debt and now declaring it is time for us freeloading citizens to start paying the bills. Federal agents can now write their own search warrants, search your home, seize your property and throw you in jail if you tell anyone about it. No knock search warrants are being issued so police can smash in your door and storm your house with weapons drawn. Some Police forces are equipping themselves with armoured vehicles and military grade weapons...

Never mind, no chance that this whole thing could spin out of control!

January 12, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.
tderng said...

"We now have a national gun registry. Our streets will be safer,our police force will be safer. The world will follow our example." Adolf Hitler,1935

Every tyrannical government began the disarmament of its populace by having a national gun registry.The ability of a government to track every gun is the first step in disarming the populace. This is a way for the governments to know which houses to raid to confiscate the weaponry.

January 12, 2013 at 12:16 p.m.
tifosi said...

Maximus: Why did the NRA oppose Kagen's nomination?

"But members of the powerful National Rifle Association say Kagan's responses amount to a smokescreen, and the gun-rights organization has launched a last-ditch effort to oppose her confirmation. The NRA has warned it will campaign against any Kagan supporter who faces re-election in the years ahead."

January 12, 2013 at 12:16 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Rebus said...Creeping tyranny. And you left wing-nuts just too thick to see it. Or maybe not...maybe you want the Fed to control ALL aspects of your lives.

Rebus - are you part of the group that is responsible for the following?:

January 12, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.
Oldhickory said...

When seconds count the police are only minutes away.

January 12, 2013 at 12:18 p.m.
tifosi said...

I have yet to see anyone post anything supporting disarming Americans. Your point is hollow Oldhickory.

January 12, 2013 at 12:22 p.m.
conservative said...

Ike, I strongly believe the cartoon represents a reality the loontoonist would prefer. If not, then he is just exploiting the frail of mind to further hysteria.

Regulating, registering, and tracing firearms will not stop criminals from obtaining guns and killing others with them. It certainly didn't work with the Sandy Hook shooter, the basis for the latest misplaced hysteria over the misuse of guns.

Yes, we do that with cars but cars are not manufactured for self defense even though more people are killed by the misuse of them. This is a silly analogy that destroys your argument in my opinion.

Not one of your recommendations would have stopped the Sandy Hook shooter or any other criminal from killing others.

Also, you are unjustified in blaming the NRA for irresponsible gun owners. They have not been given the authority or responsibility to control anyone's behavior.

January 12, 2013 at 12:24 p.m.
Sailorman said...

From fbi.gov 2011

Total murders by firearm 8,583

Using handguns 6,220

Using rifles (of all types) 323

Simple question:

Why is the focus on semi-auto rifles?

January 12, 2013 at 12:25 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sailorman, because one nut was able to kill 26 people before anyone could have possibly intervened. It is a rare occurrence, yes, but the low probability is scant comfort for those families now.

If you own guns for hunting, the high capacity semi-automatic is overkill (no pun intended). If you need it for self defense, unless you have a huge crowd of zombies trying to get in every window and door, it's overkill. If you need it to defend yourself from a rogue US government, stop to consider what firepower you are up against.

January 12, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.
tderng said...

tifosi said... If a gun owner fails to properly secure a firearm and it is taken by someone else and used to commit a crime/suicide/accidents, then the gun owner should face a stiff prison sentence. Civil and criminal prosecution to the full extent of the law will change habits.

That does not infringe on the 2nd Amendment.

Any gun that is in a gun safe is useless in an armed invasion. You will be dead before you can get it out of the safe. As a friend (who is a firearm and carry permit instructor)said to me,"any gun that is not loaded at all times is merely a very expensive paperweight." Now ,that is not to say that the gun shouldn't be kept in a place that is safe if there are children in the house. Even spare guns stored in a gun safe can be stolen and used in a crime if the thief wants it bad enough. Even a large heavy gun safe can be stolen by thieves with a two-wheeled dolly and a little muscle.

January 12, 2013 at 12:33 p.m.
Oldhickory said...

tifosi, A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

January 12, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "If you need it to defend yourself from a rogue US government, stop to consider what firepower you are up against."

What a great argument supporting the notion that we may have already given up too many freedoms with respect to the 2nd Amendment.

Governments, killing people by the thousands and millions since history began!

January 12, 2013 at 12:40 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

A citizen in a home with firearms, or the assumption that they have firearms, is probably as good a deterrent to that kind of crime as any. I am convinced that the gun culture in my rural area is the reason that there are so few intruder incidents. If someone is that determined to get in your house, they are going to make damn sure you are not there.

However, this notion that we keep firearms to protect ourselves from our own government? Crazy talk. Pure and simple. This is not 1930's Germany, or the USSR. Our laws and constitution are set up to keep the government from getting too much power and to protect the rights of citizens. It works better than even the "most free" of any democratic countries. There has always been the fringe that believes this is possible, but now with the internet even the fringe can appear mainstream. Add a black man in the White House, and it is completely over the top. Some of you need to gain a little perspective, or at least get a hobby. Good grief. It's embarrassing, folks.

January 12, 2013 at 12:43 p.m.
Oldhickory said...

Iowa lawmaker calls for retroactive gun ban, confiscation of semi-automatic weapons

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-bans-confiscations-of-semi-automatic-weapons/#ixzz2Hmgih3Rl

January 12, 2013 at 12:43 p.m.
tifosi said...

You can make all the arguments you want. The fact is, a law that requires gun owners to secure a firearm DOES NOT violate the 2nd Amendment.

January 12, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.
tderng said...

lkeithlu said... If you need it to defend yourself from a rogue US government, stop to consider what firepower you are up against.

Ikeithlu...Do you believe that every member of our armed services would fire on the American populace? More than likely many would desert and bring their weaponry/planes ect. with them. Thereby leveling the playing field. Even with much superior firepower and control of the skies the government of Syria is losing the civil war there.

January 12, 2013 at 12:47 p.m.
tifosi said...

For the record. You folks are arguing with someone that used to sleep with one of these. Literally in my sleeping bag.

January 12, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

tderng, if your fantasies include joining up with deserters against the government, perhaps you should move to Syria. This is the USA. We are better than that.

January 12, 2013 at 12:52 p.m.
Maximus said...

tifosi...well Kagan is a plus sized bull dike socialist that will dance with Obama every step of the way toward making our country a mediocre, but fair U.K. like weak sister defenseless, socialist utopia, where no one, not anyone will ever, ever, get their feelings hurt again. Just obey the government officials....they know what's best for us. Kagan made the settled law comment during her confirmation hearings. Like most of Obama's thugs, the end justify's the means. Kagan was right about the second ammendment being settled law but that is not how she interprets the law now. She lied but she was right. The NRA was very, very, right in opposing Bull Dike Fatty Lib Kagan.

January 12, 2013 at 12:52 p.m.
tifosi said...

I won't be deserting and I will shoot anyone that threatens our democracy. No second thoughts about it. I'll be the one in an M1 Abrams.

Maximus: You were the one that validated Justice Kagan. Not me.

January 12, 2013 at 12:54 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ike

That same nut could have, and some have, done the same thing with a semi-auto pistol so the questions still remains - why the focus on semi-auto rifles?

January 12, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.
carlB said...

What ARE The True OBJECTIVES of the ANTI OBAMA AND ANTI GOVERNMENT "GROUPS"? So far, I have stayed out of this Gun discussion and the arrogance being shown by the extreme "mixed up" thinking of what the 2nd Amendment is all about by the "people" wanting to give reasons and even manufacturing excuses to justify their owning any type of weapon and it's accessories, without any restrictions.

There are other situations/conditions/events occurring which could possibly create the circumstances of having "Anarchy" to occur in the USA and even to occur world wide. From all of the indications, there are many people who would prefer to live in a world wide "Anarchy" than to live in a balanced "Republic" with laws and a government strong enough to keep the needed balanced conditions.

I am sure that every individual has a separate answer for what the conditions are that would be the cause of an "Anarchy" occurring to justify their 2nd Amendment rights?

January 12, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.
Sailorman said...

tifosi

If you're using your M-1 Abrams to support disarming Americans, my neighbors kid will be the one in the Warthog discussing your plans with you :)

The whole notion is silly anyway.

January 12, 2013 at 1:09 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tderng said... "We now have a national gun registry. Our streets will be safer,our police force will be safer. The world will follow our example." Adolf Hitler,1935

"Whenever a politician, or anyone else, starts talking about regulating guns, it’s a safe bet that someone will bring up how Hitler supposedly outlawed guns in Germany, which supposedly enabled him to do all the mischief he did. As we’ve noted before, Adolf is a staple reference among propagandists. It’s become an automatic response to compare anyone you don’t like to Der Fuhrer, on the grounds that since he was evil incarnate, everything he ever said or did must also be evil. People have even been known to suggest that since he was a vegetarian, vegetarians are evil. It’s not surprising, then, that you often see this quote pop up:

“This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!” –Adolf Hitler, 1935

Trouble is, Hitler never made such a speech in 1935. Nor is there any record that he ever spoke these particular words at all. This little “speech” was obviously written for him, many years after his death, by someone who wanted you to believe that gun registration is Hitler-evil."

January 12, 2013 at 1:09 p.m.
MTJohn said...

.

January 12, 2013 at 1:18 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tderng said... "...More than likely many would desert and bring their weaponry/planes ect. with them."

LOL! Hey Commander, is that an F22 Raptor in your pocket, or are you just glad to see tderng?

January 12, 2013 at 1:18 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "This is the USA. We are better than that."

That sounds very naive. This world is changing so fast that our relatives of only 100 years ago would not recognise it. For you to presume that you know what this nation looks like after another 100 years is utterly laughable.

Progressives: Spending our children into poverty and stripping their Constitutional protections forever.

January 12, 2013 at 1:18 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sorry, BRP, but if I can't have faith in this great nation, what can I have faith in? Without evidence to the contrary, I refuse to get sucked into these conspiracy delusions. It's positively unpatriotic. Look at your avatar, hon.

There have always been conspiracy nuts. They were ignored, allowed to congregate in Idaho and store food for the coming chaos, and generally written off as cracks. After 40 years of hearing about them, I still write them off as cracks, even though through the internet they can spread their crazy ideas to whoever is seeking a reason to believe them. This great nation has been here for more than 230 years, sustained through MUCH harder times than this by our constitution and unique style of government. I refuse to buy, without evidence, that it is at risk. And NO ONE CAN PRODUCE ANYTHING that suggests that we are about to lose either our constitution or our freedoms.

Call me naive if you wish. That puts me with a fairy large group, including anyone who serves in the military.

January 12, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.
Sailorman said...

dude

If you're going to quote from this guy, at least give him credit:

http://propagandaprofessor.net/2011/09/26/the-myth-of-hitlers-gun-ban/

Not disputing at all what's said but, in fairness to poor ol' Adolph, you could include what he actually did say (according to your source):

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.”

January 12, 2013 at 1:32 p.m.
rick1 said...

keithlu, said Our laws and constitution are set up to keep the government from getting too much power and to protect the rights of citizens. It works better than even the "most free" of any democratic countries. There has always been the fringe that believes this is possible, but now with the internet even the fringe can appear mainstream. Add a black man in the White House, and it is completely over the top. Some of you need to gain a little perspective, or at least get a hobby. Good grief. It's embarrassing, folks.

You need to read this article as it appears you are either in denial or have your head buried in the sand.

http://jonathanturley.org/2012/01/15/10-reasons-the-u-s-is-no-longer-the-land-of-the-free/

January 12, 2013 at 1:33 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

A little over a hundred years ago there was no income tax, no FICA taxes, no government takeover of retirement, charity, healthcare... We were a republic that respected our Constitution. Today our government is socialist by almost any measurement and the government is growing so fast a citizen has absolutely no hope of being able to keep abreast of what the government is up to. Government by nature expands to its own benefit at a cost to its own citizens.

Our founding fathers did the best they could to protect us from government decay but they could not change human nature and the laws of political behaviour. We have reached a tipping point and the cast of characters in Washington is not intellectually equipped to stop the slide, they might try, but they are no longer bound by the Constitution. They use the commerce clause as an excuse to violate every other tenant on a routine basis.

Tyrants ALWAYS take away your freedom in the name of the better good (commerce clause). That is why it is so dangerous that we have been condition to EXPECT lies from politicians as a routine part of governance. Given enough power, all governments will eventually become tyrannical. It may take another 100 or 200 years, I do not expect to see it, but chances are better that things will go in that direction than this happy place you seem to imagine. Read history.

January 12, 2013 at 1:43 p.m.
Rebus said...

BRP: Many don't recognize the USA of only 30 years ago.

January 12, 2013 at 1:47 p.m.
conservative said...

MtJohn,

I like your 1:18 comment.

Just kidding!

January 12, 2013 at 1:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "Call me naive if you wish. That puts me with a fairy large group,"

Yep, a relatively comfortable, entitled, unconscious group. Much like the mighty Roman Empire not long before its collapse.

January 12, 2013 at 1:49 p.m.
timbo said...

One more time......THIS IS INCREMENTALISM. Gun laws are applied differently in different parts of the country. If people in NY want this stupidity then fine. What we are justifiably worried about is the NY or Chicago or DC fungus will spread. Come on....we know your tactics and goal. You will try to achieve that goal in baby steps just like the good little pinko socialists you are.

As for Bennett's "brilliance". I will copy my letter above to retort.

*FREUDIAN SLIP ALERT

WELL, WHAT DO YOU KNOW, BENNETT AND THE REST OF YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS HAVE BEEN OUTED. WHAT DOES THIS PICTURE SHOW? A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL ARRESTING A LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN. WHY? BECAUSE HE HAD THE AUDACITY TO USE HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND HIS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT WHICH READS "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." This is not subject to interpretation and couldn't be clearer.

THIS COULDN'T BE MORE REVEALING IF A CONSERVATIVE HAD PAID THAT IDIOT BENNETT TO DRAW IT FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THIS IS JUST WHAT YOU NATIONAL SOCIALISTS WANT, AND WHAT WE FEAR. THE GOVERNMENT TAKING AWAY OUR MOST IMPORTANT RIGHTS! THAT IS WHY WE NEED WEAPONS TO ASSURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

This just shows how dumb Bennett and the rest of you liberals are. I couldn't have drawn a more informative cartoon my self. This is what is called a "FREUDIAN SLIP".

Now go ahead, bluster, use your childish tactic of telling us that "we don't want your guns" we just want you to be "sensible." Then you can call me names and get a rotary cuff injury patting yourselves on the back about how "smart" you are but the fact remains that Bennett just revealed by accident what your real intentions are.

So go ahead and write a million pithy, insulting posts but you can't get away from this Freudian slip. Now knock yourselves out!!!

THANK YOU BENNETT, ...YOU BLITHERING, CHILDISH IDIOT.

January 12, 2013 at 1:59 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Interesting column, rick1, and interesting additional one on free speech. Although the free speech column referenced acts in counties such as Canada, UK and France, it only warned of not going the way of those countries. The actions taken after 9/11 were directed at those accused of terrorism. Yes, we must be vigilant, but those changes will not affect the vast majority of us. That's a FAR cry from a rogue government. Sorry. I don't buy it.

January 12, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.
tderng said...

lkeithlu said... tderng, if your fantasies include joining up with deserters against the government, perhaps you should move to Syria. This is the USA. We are better than that.

I said nothing about joining,just that it would happen if the government tried a complete takeover and a civil war erupted. I am by far too old to re-arm and fight. The truth is that I believe that the young entitled generation of this country would not do anything to defend their rights. Like the sheep they are they would blindly walk into the slaughterhouse.

Sailorman said...the whole notion is silly anyway. Maybe, but I am sure that the citizenry of every nation that has slipped into tyranny believed the same thing until it was too late. I personally could care less what the government decides any more I won't be here to deal with it and if the socialists and entitlement crowd take over it is no skin off my back. They will get what they deserve.

January 12, 2013 at 2:17 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ike

That same nut could have, and some have, done the same thing with a semi-auto pistol so the questions still remains - why the focus on semi-auto rifles?

Anybody?

January 12, 2013 at 2:20 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

I am not sure why Bennett portrayed the arrest of LaPierre. Except for the fact that the NRA continues to make some outlandish statements that seem to incite violence (one just has to look at the recent Tennessean James Yeager incident to see how the NRA position impacts fearful citizens) and they, oddly enough, keep a "scorecard" of how NRA friendly members of Congress actually are, I'm not sure what offense that he has committed that would warrant arrest.

Maybe the good guys see him as a terrorist. Hmmm...

January 12, 2013 at 2:20 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I have to agree Savarti. I hold more distain for Huckabee who implied that God let the CT shooting happen because "we've taken God out of schools". Kinda makes God sound pretty petulant and hateful, no?

Sailorman, that would depend. If it is a semiautomatic pistol with 30 round magazines it could also happen (another weapon that belongs in the hands of the police and military only. However, pistols are hard to shoot accurately, whereas these rifles are designed to be very effective with almost no aiming required; very little kick or recoil.

Good grief, timbo. Listen to yourself. Try to breathe once in a while.

January 12, 2013 at 2:34 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Savarti

Maybe the good guys do see him in a less than favorable light. You just have to look at the response of Tennessee gun owners to see that Yeager is clearly not mainstream. On a Tennessee gunowners forum, there are right now 179 responses not a single one of which support him. On the same forum, is a discussion of the two boneheads on trial for selling weapons without a license. They aren't getting any support either.

The NRA's statement are no more outrageous than those of the media, politicians, and any number of posters on forums. In fact, whether any of them are outrageous or not is nothing more than an opinion. Hmmmm.....

January 12, 2013 at 2:40 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ike

Let's dispense with the magazine question. 1 x 30 round vs 2 x 15 rd in many semi-auto pistols (Sig p226) A magazine change takes less than a second. The whole magazine thing is a red herring. 6 x 5 vs 1 x 30 the time effect would be a few seconds at most.

In a closed short range environment, the pistol is every bit as deadly as the rifle. Recoil may be an issue if a 45 was being used but a 9mm? Not so much.

"these rifles are designed to be very effective with almost no aiming required" I can't believe you actually said that.

January 12, 2013 at 2:50 p.m.
rick1 said...

lkeithlu,said "Yes, we must be vigilant, but those changes will not affect the vast majority of us. That's a FAR cry from a rogue government. Sorry. I don't buy it."

First of all our Constitution is for all Americans not just the "vast majority".

I notice you forgot to mention some other issues in the article.

You can honestly say our government is a far cry from being rouge when all of the issues listed below are occurring in this country?

The Obama Administration has stated the president can order the assassination of any citizen whom he considers allied with terrorists?

The Administration continues to claim the right to strip citizens of legal protections based on its sole discretion. The article stated China recently codified a more limited detention law for its citizens, while countries such as Cambodia have been singled out by the United States for “prolonged detention.”

The president making the decison on whether a person will receive a trial in the federal courts or in a military tribunal. Where is the due process protections?

Warrantless surveillance, including a new capability to force companies and organizations to turn over information on citizens’ finances, communications and associations.

The government has increased its use of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has expanded its secret warrants to include individuals deemed to be aiding or abetting hostile foreign governments or organizations.

January 12, 2013 at 2:53 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Sorry, sailorman, I put the quotation marks on it, but neglected the source name. So, you have more of a problem with that than with tderng's misquote? Sorta like the semi-auto handgun vs. semi-auto rifle question. What I put in my post was the truth. What he put in his post was not true. You take issue with my post. What does that show us?

January 12, 2013 at 3:18 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sailorman, I read that the military style semiautomatic had very little recoil, and could be used to inflict maximum impact without having to be aimed carefully because of that. I wish I could remember where I read it, but it was why the weapon was developed. In the heat of battle, to have to carefully aim between shots because of recoil was difficult due to the intense stress on the soldier, so they made these weapons much easier to hold and fire in one direction. If I can find the source I'll post it.

January 12, 2013 at 3:24 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

rick1, can you tell me a time when these laws were applied to a US citizen? Do you know of anyone who has been arrested, held or tried under these laws? (other than foreigners suspected of terrorism) It's an honest question, because as unfortunate as the conditions are where these laws were put in place (many by the previous administration) it is a bit of a reach to say that our constitution or freedoms are being eroded.

By the way, I am not sure what side of this issue I am on-it's tough-the 911 terrorists were all living and working in the US. However, I am not going to draw a direct line between keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of the mentally unstable and the government going rogue.

January 12, 2013 at 3:28 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ike

I'd be interested in the source thank you

As far as I'm concerned, the question still stands. Why the focus on semi-auto rifles? Focusing on a few hundred vs thousands really can't be justified.

January 12, 2013 at 3:32 p.m.
raygunz said...

rick1,I must agree with your points @ 2:53pm,also, BRP's concerns about the government's undermining of our civil rights. I am especially concerned about the gutting of our 4th amendment rights,unlawful search&seizure,illegal wire-tapping,no-knock warrants,(or even no warrant at all). All done in the name of the so-called "War on Terror" or "War on Drugs". But, with all the weapons in the hands of citizens today, no-one has made any effort to confront the Government on these issues. So what makes you think anyone will ever do so?

If people want to fight back, the ballot-box is the only weapon that can work.

January 12, 2013 at 3:33 p.m.
Sailorman said...

dude

Regardless of the quote issue, you were right he was wrong. You pointed it out to him. If he tries to defend, maybe I'll say something. Otherwise, you said what needed to be said.

I don't read all of his posts anymore than I read all of yours. That old Nazi quote has been around a long time - and it still isn't true regardless of how many times it's repeated.

Sorry if you feel picked on :)

January 12, 2013 at 3:37 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Again, sailorman, obviously the number of rifles is small, and the number of incidents are small. But to the families of those involved, that doesn't matter. The shootings that involved these weapons were random and had many victims, they happened at the hands of people that should not have had access to them, and they happened so fast that bystanders could not save very many. My point is not banning guns; I own them myself. But as the laws are now , I could have personally sold those weapons to those shooters, no background check, no liability for me. Doesn't that bother you? Does the 2nd amendment as envisioned by the founders extend to these possible situations? Other here are talking about losing freedoms; are we not losing the freedom to live in a country where these weapons are not in the hands of civilians who may be unstable? Must we live in a world where every public place has to be locked, with bulletproof glass and armed guards simply because sportsmen want weapons designed for combat and don't want to be held responsible for them? Or that so many people are so convinced by the crap they read on the internet that it is just a matter of time before we slip into chaos and we have to live in armed compounds and shoot everything that moves into the perimeter? Sounds like hell.

January 12, 2013 at 3:44 p.m.
limric said...

Y’know, I agree with Timbo about…um…nothing, but his statement from 9:13 a.m (quoted below) makes a pretty good point.

WHAT DOES THIS PICTURE SHOW? A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL ARRESTING A LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN. WHY? BECAUSE HE HAD THE AUDACITY TO USE HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND HIS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT.”

I do get the meaning of the cartoon Clay. Pretty slick. :-)

January 12, 2013 at 3:45 p.m.
jdavid said...

".. and on the third day, God created the Browning automatic rifle with which Adam might smite the Tyrannosaurus Rex" Tina Fey "Mean Girls" 2:12-15

January 12, 2013 at 3:46 p.m.
rick1 said...

Lu, American-born Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki

http://www.salon.com/2010/04/07/assassinations_2/

January 12, 2013 at 3:47 p.m.
dude_abides said...

I read all of your posts, sailorman. Now I'm depressed. I would cap myself, but I don't have any weapons around.

January 12, 2013 at 3:53 p.m.
rick1 said...

raygunz, I'm also very concerned with Obama threatening to use an Excutive Order to make gun control laws. This would be a violation of the Constitution and yet there are those who say we are paranoid that the government is going to take our guns away.

January 12, 2013 at 3:54 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "Must we live in a world where every public place has to be locked, with bulletproof glass and armed guards simply because sportsmen want weapons designed for combat and don't want to be held responsible for them?"

This is exactly why you will never be able to formulate a constructive answer to a situation like Newtown. Anyone that can come to believe that sportsmen are responsible for the violent acts of others or if that even has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment is completely disconnected with the core issues at hand.

There are dangerous people in the world. There always will be dangerous people in the world. The government creates an opportunity for dangerous people to cause mayhem every time they create a gun (most effective tool for personal protection) free zone. It should be obvious to the most casual observer that the government should accept the responsibility to provide security in areas where they have made it impossible for citizens to protect themselves.

If we taught that people are responsible for their own protection, removed all of the stupid restrictions on concealed carry and stopped vilifying gun ownership the problem would for the most part take care of itself.

January 12, 2013 at 3:56 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

And how would this have prevented the CT shooting?

January 12, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.
Maximus said...

Thanks Clay, you reminded me that I need to renew my NRA membership!

January 12, 2013 at 4:10 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

It is amazing how some people can completely get why the 2nd Amendment is important and others completely miss it. Hopefully we will not have to go through some kind of holocaust of our own to learn what our founding fathers knew and so eloquently explained.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=B31SUm0nrwc

Why Switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world

January 12, 2013 at 4:10 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "And how would this have prevented the CT shooting?"

The part about providing (armed) security or the part about letting people protect themselves without government infringement?

I should have specified "armed", I was probably thinking that would be assumed by now.

January 12, 2013 at 4:16 p.m.
aae1049 said...

Keep your guns and ignore the Feds

January 12, 2013 at 4:27 p.m.
jesse said...

After all the grandstanding,pandering and jawboning armed security in the schools is what will go down! It can happin inside 2 weeks once they decide to do it!all this other stuff will take years and 2/3 rds. of it will be knocked down by scotus!

January 12, 2013 at 4:29 p.m.
Rebus said...

dude_ says "I read all of your posts, sailorman. Now I'm depressed. I would cap myself, but I don't have any weapons around."

Dude_ II would gladly supply you with the necessary ordnance, but I fear the ricochet in your basement Wouldn't want collateral damage on an on his knees Easy123.

January 12, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.
rick1 said...

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? Is it the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason Co-Author of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

January 12, 2013 at 4:41 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ike

"obviously the number of rifles is small, and the number of incidents are small. But to the families of those involved, that doesn't matter."

In a way, you're touching on my point. The number IS small. But it happened in a manner and place that allowed the media and politicians to capitalize on it - which they were quick to do. Within hours the talking heads were clamoring about gun control. Those children are no more or less dead than the ones killed by cars, neglect, or hammers. Neither are they more or less dead than the black youths shot in Chicago each weekend (mostly by each other).

So, imo, it boils down to a question of what exactly are the politicians trying to stop? Deaths, deaths by firearms, or firearms?

Again imo, they want the guns. If deaths are lessened, great but that's not the main thrust. The next question is why.

You obviously have a different opinion. That's great. If everybody has the same opinion, only one person is doing the thinking.

January 12, 2013 at 4:58 p.m.
Sailorman said...

dude

awww don't get dramatic lol After all, I did take your side.

January 12, 2013 at 5 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Rebus said... "Dude_ II would gladly supply you with the necessary ordnance, but I fear the ricochet in your basement Wouldn't want collateral damage on an on his knees Easy123."

Kinda what this whole discussion is about, huh Jack_? Keeping an ample supply of handheld mayhem available. Thanks for being there, you Hollywood action hero, you! Truth is, somebody would yank that piece out of your quivering hand and whip your a$$ with it! (Barely able to type from laughing)

January 12, 2013 at 5:13 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

The only thing anyone has to do to see that gun control does not work, and only benefits criminals, is to look at the map of Chattanooga with the shooting locations labeled.

People with nothing left to lose, or those who value life and liberty so little that they don't care what happens, are the only people who commit gun violence. Lawful owners who have applied to purchase a firearm already know that they are on the records, and would be caught in short order if they commit a gun crime.

The people in downtown Chattanooga know who owns illegal weapons. They could call the police and report it, and most of the problem would be solved.

Gun violence is a criminal problem. Laws are not going to bring criminals into compliance. Enforce the ones we already have.

January 12, 2013 at 5:45 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sailorman: that's fair enough.

January 12, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.
Rebus said...

Would that be you, Mr. Dudely_??? Bwahahaha

January 12, 2013 at 6:15 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

tu, you are, as usual, full of BS.

January 12, 2013 at 6:38 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

rick1 said... "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? Is it the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason Co-Author of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

Spoken like a man that understands human interaction and did not have his mind clouded by years of public education.

January 12, 2013 at 7:36 p.m.
alprova said...

Sailorman wrote: "That same nut could have, and some have, done the same thing with a semi-auto pistol so the questions still remains - why the focus on semi-auto rifles? Anybody?"

Had Adam Lanza only had a semi-automatic pistol, depending on the make of it, he would have only been able to fire between 6 and 20 rounds without pausing to reload. Ten round clips are average.

The Bushmaster .223 that he used comes standard with 30 round clips.

It's a matter of reducing the number of bullets that can be fired without reloading, thus allowing a minimal amount of time for people to either rush the shooter or to flee from someone bent on killing as many people as possible.

Maybe it's time to ban all semi-automatics of any nature or to limit the number of bullets that a civilian weapon can discharge without reloading...period.

January 12, 2013 at 7:45 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

alprova said... "Maybe it's time to ban all semi-automatics of any nature or to limit the number of bullets that a civilian weapon can discharge without reloading...period."

Thank you for being honest.

You let them take my guns, then they take our 1st amendment, then they take our 4th amendment, hell, all of the "amendments... then they start taking a little more control of the economy and we have... CHINA! (Note that "progressives" think China is a model to aspire towards)

Way to go you government worshiping lemmings...

January 12, 2013 at 8:05 p.m.
Reardon said...

This conversation is so devoid of logic and reason my head is going to spin.

Why?

1) All firearms are assault weapons. ALL FIREARMS ARE ASSAULT WEAPONS! This is the most ILLUSIVELY OBVIOUS point NONE of you do-gooders are comprehending! What kind of weapon are you looking to NOT ban -- a DEFENSE firearm? A SECURITY weapon? This is either a basic failure of English comprehension or another successful win for the liberals who have co-opted the language and framed the debate in context of a firearm being SOMETHING OTHER than an ASSAULT weapon.

2) Al -- this is directed at your last comment. Psychopathic killers will adjust their approach to maximize the devastation they desire.

You want 30 round clips reduced to 8 rounds? Okay -- now the psychopath caries a half dozen, 7 round, fully-loaded, sawed off shotguns into the ring. He stores 3 or 4 into a back pack, and fashions a holster to hold another 2, and arms himself with the other.

Now, instead of reloading, he chucks his empty shotgun, grabs another holstered elsewhere, and continues his path of destruction.

Now you'll want to ban or reduce ammo size in shotguns. But the psychopath is ALWAYS one step ahead. Now he makes homemade explosives (like the Columbine kids did).

My point is -- despite ALL the do-good, feel-good laws you've passed to try to PREVENT a PSYCHOPATH from exacting his devastation, you've only..

Put A Band-Aid On A Festering, Growing Cancer!

-- IE -- you haven't dealt with the PSYCHO, who's responsible!

3) I'll say it because no one wants to admit it. Sorry guys, government is not GOD. No matter what legislation it puts in place to prevent what it feels as sinful (drugs, gay marriage, high-capacity magazines), people will ALWAYS find their way around it. It happened in Soviet Russia. And it happens here on a daily basis.

There WILL continue to be murdering psychos, and they WILL continue taking lives. Whether it's with guns, knives, explosives. And government -- unless it extracts ALL our natural rights -- will continually FAIL.

Because this is a CULTURAL failure. Not a LEGISLATIVE one.

Sheesh.

January 12, 2013 at 8:08 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

A country western singer with more commons sense than most of those guys ruling from Washington.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/charlie-daniels/precedent-teaches-us-left-really-wants-all-our-guns

January 12, 2013 at 8:26 p.m.
alprova said...

Nobody wants ALL YOUR GUNS. How many times must this be stated?

I have not read a statement from anyone who swings to the left that the 2nd Amendment needs to be gutted.

Lest I remind everyone that at the time the 2nd Amendment was added to the Constitution, no one on God's green Earth fathomed the invention of weapons capable of such destruction as those most often used in mass killings by deranged gunmen.

No civilian "needs" a weapon that is or was manufactured for military use and that was designed with the intent of killing in mass quantities.

If someone cannot disarm or dispense an attacker with six shots or less, then they have no business having a weapon at all for self-protection. The same premise applies to the use of a weapon for hunting.

If...and I do mean if...there are people within the Gov't who are violating the U.S. Constitution and are using the powers of Gov't to intrude into the lives of any Americans, there is not one person who embraces such theories who can do a thing to stop or prevent it.

Any of you conspiracy buffs could have an arsenal stockpile that would require a storage facility warehouse the size of a Sam's Club store and it could be taken out with the pressing of a button by a soldier employed by any mythical, tyrannical establishment.

I'm quite ambivalent when it comes to gun control, as there are no clear-cut answers that will prevent any or all instances where someone decides to kill indiscriminately if the tool they use to do it involves bullets.

At the same time that I read that people all over the nation are rushing to purchase as many military style weapons as they can afford or get their hands on, I would find it quite comical if they are demanded to be relinquished at some point in the future, if they are made 100% illegal.

Isn't it time to stop defending the indefensible?

January 12, 2013 at 9:18 p.m.
whatsnottaken said...

I'm one of the good guys with guns. Won't ever have to use then unless someone tries to harm my family or if you try to take them.

January 12, 2013 at 9:23 p.m.
Rebus said...

keithlu: Increased government control of our lives. That's the essence of tyranny. And you lefties seem to be ok with it.

January 12, 2013 at 9:31 p.m.
alprova said...

Reardon wrote: "All firearms are assault weapons. ALL FIREARMS ARE ASSAULT WEAPONS! This is the most ILLUSIVELY OBVIOUS point NONE of you do-gooders are comprehending!"

An often repeated stance of a typical gun proponent. Most people define assault weapons as those capable of dispensing several dozen rounds of ammunition without the need to pause and reload.

"What kind of weapon are you looking to NOT ban -- a DEFENSE firearm? A SECURITY weapon? This is either a basic failure of English comprehension or another successful win for the liberals who have co-opted the language and framed the debate in context of a firearm being SOMETHING OTHER than an ASSAULT weapon."

Unless one is active military, or is employed in any related field in defense or security, I would be quite content to see all semi-automatic weaponry banned from ownership by civilians.

"Al -- this is directed at your last comment. Psychopathic killers will adjust their approach to maximize the devastation they desire."

"You want 30 round clips reduced to 8 rounds? Okay -- now the psychopath caries a half dozen, 7 round, fully-loaded, sawed off shotguns into the ring. He stores 3 or 4 into a back pack, and fashions a holster to hold another 2, and arms himself with the other."

Such an individual is not going to likely escape attention as they walk or run towards any building. 911 calls will be placed immediately on sight.

"Now, instead of reloading, he chucks his empty shotgun, grabs another holstered elsewhere, and continues his path of destruction."

Maybe...maybe not. Carrying all that weaponry is going to be quite heavy and cumbersome. Any pause for any period at all could result in a gunman being rushed before he is allowed to resume.

All it takes is one second.

Jared Lee Loughner, the perpetrator in the Tuscon, Arizona shooting, was tackled and disabled while he tried to reload his pistol.

It should be highly inconvenient for anyone who has the desire to kill indiscriminately many people, or we can do nothing at all and continue to enable them with readily available, high capacity weaponry.

I'm sorry if my position makes your head spin.

It never ceases to amaze me when right-wingers who feel that courses of action will do little or nothing, on the surface, to address a problem, are more than content to do nothing at all.

Well...people who are fed up with out-of-control gun violence are determined to do something about it.

Don't look for the issue to die a natural death this time.

January 12, 2013 at 9:49 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Alprova

No one should need more than 6 rounds. Really and you base than on what? Good thing there weren't two attackers at the house in Atlanta. The poor woman unloaded her revolver and the guy was still moving. Too bad for her eh?

"No civilian "needs" a weapon that is or was manufactured for military use and that was designed with the intent of killing in mass quantities."

Who has one of those? I don't - I have a plain old AR-15 semi-auto.

Who are you to tell anybody what they need? Who is the government to tell anybody what they need? GM doesn't "need" to make a car that goes 180 mph either.

As for magazines, read and try to digest what I said earlier:

Let's dispense with the magazine question. 1 x 30 round vs 2 x 15 rd in many semi-auto pistols (Sig p226 for example) A magazine change takes less than a second. The whole magazine thing is a red herring. 6 x 5 vs 1 x 30 the time effect would be a few seconds at most.

If you want to dispute that, I'll be happy to meet you at a range with both an AR with a 30 round mag and my pistol with 2 15 rd mags. I'll even supply the ammo.

This whole discussion has gotten circular not to mention boring. Y'all have a great weekend

January 12, 2013 at 9:53 p.m.
alprova said...

I previously wrote: "No one should need more than 6 rounds."

Sailorman replied: "Really and you base than on what? Good thing there weren't two attackers at the house in Atlanta. The poor woman unloaded her revolver and the guy was still moving. Too bad for her eh?"

Clearly she didn't shoot to kill although perfectly within her right to do so. One shot aimed at his eyes or the chest with a .22 would be sufficient.

My previous statement: "No civilian "needs" a weapon that is or was manufactured for military use and that was designed with the intent of killing in mass quantities."

Sailorman's reply: "Who has one of those? I don't - I have a plain old AR-15 semi-auto."

Assuming that it was manufactured by Colt, you can easily obtain an extended clip capable of holding up to 100 rounds.

"Who are you to tell anybody what they need? Who is the government to tell anybody what they need? GM doesn't "need" to make a car that goes 180 mph either."

Well then, please take all the time and/or space necessary to make a sensible, logical case for any civilian "need" to possess an AR-15, which can be altered very easily to discharge 100 rounds of ammunition without reloading.

Convince me that I am wrong. I'll keep an open mind.

Regarding the rest of your response, I'd be happy with any legislation that outlawed the possession by any civilian of any weapon capable of holding more than six rounds and capable of being reloaded in less than five seconds.

No clips. No magazines. All a civilian may own for personal protection is a revolver, which must be Federally registered at all times.

How about that?

Don't shoot me.

January 12, 2013 at 10:22 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

alprova said... "No civilian "needs" a weapon that is or was manufactured for military use and that was designed with the intent of killing in mass quantities."

This is the thinking of someone who totally trusts their government and will entrust it with all of their security and will not expect the individual actors to abuse the power that has been handed them.

THE 2nd AMENDMENT IS INTENDED TO KEEP GOVERNMENT IN FEAR OF OVERSTEPPING AN ACTIVE AND ABLE CITIZENRY.

Of course, "progressives" trust their saviour. People who can examine human behaviour and see beyond the immediate horizon know that there is a strong possibility that government will not continue to work in the best interests of the citizens of the United States in the future.

Think about your children and what you are saddling them with, or taking away from them.

January 12, 2013 at 10:30 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "After the lies perpetrated by Obama and the left about Obamacare and Benghazi we have to work with the understanding that they want total confiscation of firearms."

Only someone like yourself, who has a zero, nada, zip record of credibility in this forum, would dare make such a stretch on one's imagination.

Benghazi spenghazi. You and all the others who believe that there was some conspiracy before, during or after, regarding what happened in Benghazi, are never going to get so much as one second worth of satisfaction. Nobody's going to the pokey. Nobody is going to be fired. Nobody is going to be impeached.

While GWB was President, 59 people were killed in Consulate and Embassy attacks. Where were all the armchair conspiracy critics of the Bush Administration from 2001 to 2008?

"Anything less than that and we will be committing national suicide for sure. No more compromise and no more retreat."

Okey dokey. I'm sure that your threat in this forum has everyone up in Washington quaking in their hush puppies.

January 12, 2013 at 10:41 p.m.
hambone said...

Why all the "they" talk?

"They" are going to come and take "our" guns.

"They" are going to tax "us" to death.

"They" want to control "our" lives.

Damn people! Get it through "your" thick heads.

"We" are "they"!

Don't be so paranoid.

"We" are the tyranical government that everyone talks about.

There is no "they" just "us"!

January 12, 2013 at 10:47 p.m.
Rebus said...

ALPO said "No clips. No magazines. All a civilian may own for personal protection is a revolver, which must be Federally registered at all times." You're kidding about the federal registration, right?

ALPO also said "Only someone like yourself, who has a zero, nada, zip record of credibility in this forum, would dare make such a stretch on one's imagination."

So ALPO, you're now the decider of credibility on here?

January 12, 2013 at 10:56 p.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "This is the thinking of someone who totally trusts their government and will entrust it with all of their security and will not expect the individual actors to abuse the power that has been handed them."

I don't "totally trust" the Gov't, but then I don't totally mistrust them either. I prefer to find a happy place and not worry about that which I have no doubt whatsoever, that I can do nothing about one way or the other.

"THE 2nd AMENDMENT IS INTENDED TO KEEP GOVERNMENT IN FEAR OF OVERSTEPPING AN ACTIVE AND ABLE CITIZENRY."

Do you truly believe that anyone in the Gov't fears any one of us, armed or disarmed, given that which they can do in an instant in response to any civil war action attempt?

Life is far too short to be keyed up all the frigging time. Chill out for once in your life. Set aside that which bothers you and concentrate on that which is positive.

"Of course, "progressives" trust their saviour."

And who would that be? Obama? He's history in four years. Life will go on and the torch will be passed to the next President, just like it has with each successive President.

"People who can examine human behaviour and see beyond the immediate horizon know that there is a strong possibility that government will not continue to work in the best interests of the citizens of the United States in the future."

Well...that all depends on what you expect from the Gov't, doesn't it? While you are fretting over that which you can do nothing about, I'll be carrying on with my life without a worry at all.

"Think about your children and what you are saddling them with, or taking away from them."

The real problem is that you are so convinced of the crap that you shovel all the time, that you really are starting to stink.

Go take a shower, don a robe, then retire to a room to light up a doobie. You'll feel better in no time.

Nobody's gonna bust your door down, I assure you.

January 12, 2013 at 11 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tu_quoque said... "DudRDunce sure envisions himself as one more bad ass .... Doesn't he ??

LMFaO !!"

Not at all, tu_. Say, are you planning another heart felt memorial to shooting victims any time soon? Between posts advocating free and open gun proliferation? What a sap you were that night! "Oh, children, I am shaken to my core! So glad you're home safe! LOL

Rebus said... "Would that be you, Mr. Dudely_??? Bwahahaha"

From your original picture, Jack_, I'd say that would be 3/4 of the people that post here, including women, you flabby gasper.

January 12, 2013 at 11:19 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova, you wrote "Most people define assault weapons as those capable of dispensing several dozen rounds of ammunition without the need to pause and reload."

I find that hard to believe since they don't exist. The Sandy Hook shooter had several 30 round magazines. The standard is 15 with 30 max for the AR 15. Most Liberals are ignorant of that. Most Liberals believe what is sold in the US are fully automatic rifles like those our military have used.

"capable of dispensing several dozen rounds", Baloney! Do the math. A few is generally considered 3-5, so several would be define as 6 or greater. 6 times a "dozen" your word, is 6 times 12 which is 72! You can not buy an AR 15 with this much magazine capacity.

I believe your "I would be quite content to see all semi-automatic weaponry banned from ownership by civilians" Any pistol, revolver, or rifle that can fire more than one round is semi-automatic because they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. I can easily empty a common revolver holding six rounds in 3 to 4 seconds You are advocating single shot pistols and rifles, an absurdity. I don't even know if one can buy a single shot pistol. You obviously have contempt for the 2nd Amendment and want America disarmed.

You then claim a person with "half a dozen" 7 round clips "is not going to likely escape attention as they walk or run towards any building. 911 calls will be placed immediately on sight."

The Sandy Hook shooter had according to the Connecticut State Police :

"According to Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance, Lanza had MULTIPLE high-capacity magazines for the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle. Those high-capacity magazines held 30 rounds each, Vance said." "Lanza also had multiple magazines for the Glock 10mm and Sig Sauer 9mm handguns."

"As a result, Vance said, Lanza was armed with "hundreds of bullets."

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/newtown-connecticut-shooting/ar15-with-high-capacity-magazines-used-by-adam-lanza-in-sandy-hook-school-shooting

So, Lanza carried an arsenal with him and no one stopped him.

Furtheremore:

The Hartford Courant is reporting that Sandy Hook gunman, Adam Lanza, used only 15 rounds from some of the 30 round magazines he was carrying.

They suggest video games are the reason that Lanza reloaded his weapon so frequently as this is a common practice in most first person shooter style video games.

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/adam-lanza-only-fired-15-shots-from-some-magazines-wore-earplugs-to-newton-school-other-new-details/

So, Lanza only used half of his available rounds, but notice he changed magazines frequently. It only takes 2-3 seconds to change magazines. Now who is going to charge such a madman. No one charged Lanza. Reducing magazine capacity is not going to stop a madman from killing. You have either been bamboozled or trying to bamboozle others.

January 12, 2013 at 11:30 p.m.
rick1 said...

Al said "Clearly she didn't shoot to kill although perfectly within her right to do so. One shot aimed at his eyes or the chest with a .22 would be sufficient."

How do you know she wasn't shooting to kill him? Have you ever been in this type of situation Al? Have you ever been in a situation where ypu had to use a firearm on a person who wanted to kill you? It is obvious you haven't because if you had you would not be making stupid comments about only needing six rounds.

January 12, 2013 at 11:33 p.m.
alprova said...

rick1 wrote: "How do you know she wasn't shooting to kill him? Have you ever been in this type of situation Al?"

As a matter of fact, I have.

"Have you ever been in a situation where ypu had to use a firearm on a person who wanted to kill you?"

Yes I have.

"It is obvious you haven't because if you had you would not be making stupid comments about only needing six rounds."

I shot one time and that was all that was needed.

January 12, 2013 at 11:59 p.m.
rick1 said...

Then you were very lucky. It is not uncommon to be in this type of situation and fire six rounds as that is the number of rounds you believe we should only be allowed to carry and intending to top the bad guy and to miss him or to hit nut not stop him.

Once again how do you know the lady was not trying yo kill him? Just because you said you were in this situation one time and were lucky enough to stop the person with one shot does not give you the right to say what was in her mind. Every situation is different.

January 13, 2013 at 12:10 a.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "I find that hard to believe since they don't exist. The Sandy Hook shooter had several 30 round magazines."

Okay...

"The standard is 15 with 30 max for the AR 15."

There are about 36 manufacturers that have made AR-15's. Extended clips holding up to 100 rounds are available for many of them.

"Do the math. A few is generally considered 3-5, so several would be define as 6 or greater. 6 times a "dozen" your word, is 6 times 12 which is 72! You can not buy an AR 15 with this much magazine capacity."

New? No, but you can install on most AR-15/M-16 weapons, an after-market higher capacity magazine.

"Any pistol, revolver, or rifle that can fire more than one round is semi-automatic because they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger."

Of course you are right, but you cannot reload a revolver in a second or two, so I'd be content to see any weapon outlawed that does not have to be manually reloaded after firing six shots.

"I can easily empty a common revolver holding six rounds in 3 to 4 seconds You are advocating single shot pistols and rifles, an absurdity."

I mistyped. You are correct that most revolvers are semi-automatic. I used the wrong terminology. Sorry. Six shots...manually reload.

"You obviously have contempt for the 2nd Amendment and want America disarmed."

Look...if the first gun had never been invented, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Would I be happier in a world without guns? You bet your ass I would. But we're beyond that now.

A tool used by any civilian to take the life of another human being should not be easy to use or capable of taking multiple lives in a matter of seconds.

"So, Lanza carried an arsenal with him and no one stopped him."

Imagine had he only been able to squeeze off six rounds of ammunition, then would have had to manually reload. Do you still think that 26 people would have died?

"They suggest video games are the reason that Lanza reloaded his weapon so frequently as this is a common practice in most first person shooter style video games."

OMG. I'm not about to even offer a response to that one. It's absurd to blame video games, but the NRA needs a scapegoat, don't they?

"Now who is going to charge such a madman. No one charged Lanza."

Two classrooms of 6 and 7 year old kids and six women. Who would you have expected to charge the man?

"Reducing magazine capacity is not going to stop a madman from killing."

Forget magazines at all. Ban every weapon owned by any civilian that does not have to be manually reloaded...period.

I don't pass any laws. What I think will likely never come to pass. It's strictly my opinion and nothing more.

January 13, 2013 at 12:47 a.m.
alprova said...

rick1 wrote: "Then you were very lucky. It is not uncommon to be in this type of situation and fire six rounds as that is the number of rounds you believe we should only be allowed to carry and intending to top the bad guy and to miss him or to hit nut not stop him."

I'm sorry, but if after discharging a weapon six times, if one has not hit a mark, they need to lay that gun down.

"Once again how do you know the lady was not trying yo kill him? Just because you said you were in this situation one time and were lucky enough to stop the person with one shot does not give you the right to say what was in her mind. Every situation is different."

I'll give you that, but one shot through the heart or into the brain, and it's game over.

I wasn't there. I imagine that the woman was scared out of her wits and did not take the time to aim at the man properly to inflict deadly harm. Adrenaline pumping...shaky hands...there are many reasons why she didn't kill the man with six shots.

As I understand it, she shot the man in the face and the neck, so at least two bullets hit the man. She used a 32 caliber handgun. That should have done the job. It appears to me that she aimed to high and/or too low. Who knows? Maybe she did not want to kill the man.

Me? If someone were to enter my home in the manner that he did, I would not hesitate to aim for either his heart or right between the eyes.

One shot might miss the mark, but you can bet that the second one would not.

January 13, 2013 at 1:02 a.m.
Rebus said...

ALPO aka killer LMAO

January 13, 2013 at 1:19 a.m.
jesse said...

The first stage of the "police combat practical pistol course" is fired at 7 yards ,12 rounds in 10 seconds!How fast is that??(w/a revolver!)

January 13, 2013 at 5:28 a.m.
limric said...

Here's one that's sure to piss off everybody.

http://www.mattbors.com/blog/2013/01/07/guns-in-our-schools/

January 13, 2013 at 8:48 a.m.
Sailorman said...

Al

Y'know I have to give you credit. Anybody that can spin the bull you post with what I can only assume is a straight face is a real artist. You don't appear to understand all you know about the subject at hand. Perhaps you should stick to accounting. Isn't this your busy time of year?

It's a shame the poor woman isn't the master gunfighter you are. Even luckier there wasn't another assailant.

As far as "clips" go - what does being manufactured by Colt have to do with anything. An AR15 is an AR15. Any one of them can accept what I think you mean is a 100 round drum magazine. No "alterations" required. They cost a couple of hundred bucks and are notoriously prone to jam. Why would anyone want one? Beats me. Heavy and prone to jamming but hey it's their choice.

Neat seque

"Well then, please take all the time and/or space necessary to make a sensible, logical case for any civilian "need" to possess an AR-15, which can be altered very easily to discharge 100 rounds of ammunition without reloading."

Convince me that I am wrong. I'll keep an open mind.

I'll make you the same offer: Please take all the time and/or space necessary to make a sensible, logical case for a government entity to determine what my, or anybody's', needs are (including a semi-auto rifle regardless of how scary some people want to make them seem). Can we have a needs czar? Can the czar decide if I can have a car that can go twice as fast as any speed limit in the country?

Convince me that I am wrong. I'll keep an open mind.

"I'd be happy with any legislation that outlawed the possession by any civilian of any weapon capable of holding more than six rounds and capable of being reloaded in less than five seconds."

I'd be happy with any legislation that outlawed the possession by any criminal of a weapon. Silly me - we already have those so let me rephrase; I'd be happy with the enforcement of existing legislation that outlaws the possession by a criminal.

Don't stab me with your pencil.

January 13, 2013 at 1:40 p.m.
nowfedup said...

Just asking Why is not the nation out raged at the current call for arming schools, no other civil nation needs such? More guns are not a solution, we nationally should ALL be ashamed arming schools even considered. Why does anyone need a 308cal pistol, 8in barrel, 20-30rd mags, or other derivation of AR/AK in pistol form, or need a high capacity shot/handgun other then to kill people. Please, "my 2nd right" is not an excuse, it is a cry of fear from paranoid sicko's;. Why does USAista's not offer ONE solution to massive and increasing shootings across USA other then 'more guns"? Why does not NRA/NRAista's, the self appointed "safe gun users" demand immediate standardization for carry permits? GA does NOT require ONE SHOT be fired for permit, other states at 20 or less. NO ONE is qualified to carry with that sort of "training", yet gunnies and NRA sit silently while such fools are among us. So why the silence,e to dumb to speak out or to fearful of contributing to a safer society, do you really want CCL out there with firepower under coat up to that 308 20rd pistol running about?

Doubt any gunnies will respond as to stand up to idiot NRA sponsored stuff like "Silencer OK on hunting guns in GA is OK"? Decades of gun shooting, reloading,etc and tired of telling folks that long time shooter but not nut case clueless NRA whom as I noted dodge all of the above so NRA can push more guns sales since they are registered gun mfg lobby NOT gun owners lobby;

January 14, 2013 at 1:40 p.m.
nowfedup said...

Just asking Why is not the nation out raged at the current call for arming schools, no other civil nation needs such? More guns are not a solution, we nationally should ALL be ashamed arming schools even considered. Why does anyone need a 308cal pistol, 8in barrel, 20-30rd mags, or other derivation of AR/AK in pistol form, or need a high capacity shot/handgun other then to kill people. Please, "my 2nd right" is not an excuse, it is a cry of fear from paranoid sicko's;. Why does USAista's not offer ONE solution to massive and increasing shootings across USA other then 'more guns"? Why does not NRA/NRAista's, the self appointed "safe gun users" demand immediate standardization for carry permits? GA does NOT require ONE SHOT be fired for permit, other states at 20 or less. NO ONE is qualified to carry with that sort of "training", yet gunnies and NRA sit silently while such fools are among us. So why the silence,e to dumb to speak out or to fearful of contributing to a safer society, do you really want CCL out there with firepower under coat up to that 308 20rd pistol running about?

Since NRAista's so love guns in school, what is MIN cal, min training and min time requal for school Wytt E's. Note a 9mm/44M will NOT penetrate a level lll bullet proof vest shooter now use.

Doubt any gunnies will respond as to stand up to idiot NRA sponsored stuff like "Silencer OK on hunting guns in GA is OK"? Decades of gun shooting, reloading,etc and tired of telling folks that long time shooter but not nut case clueless NRA whom as I noted dodge all of the above so NRA can push more guns sales since they are registered gun mfg lobby NOT gun owners lobby;

January 14, 2013 at 1:42 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Not exactly a new concept. According to the Dept of Education, 28,300 schools already have armed guards.

January 15, 2013 at 7:59 a.m.
TorresD30 said...

Clay Bennett’s graphical statement transcends the average progressive, liberal, Democrat position of opposing the private ownership of guns.

Mr. Bennett statement is to advocate law enforcement arrest Wayne LaPierre for the crime of “Thinking bad thoughts”.

January 16, 2013 at 1:32 p.m.
nowfedup said...

Hoted that NRA's fans, none seem capable of answering why no test for carry, any need for hi caliber pistols or why none are upset that USA reached a low point where all schools must be armed, nor what other nations have same plans in action. Seems all that most do is howl like rabid animals about "keep my guns, and more guns are only solution How sad for USA that reasonable people cannot get together and reasonably solve the violence, appears some NRA types will not even address serious flaws in systems like 100% background checks on all guns, wonder why, or do we already know?

January 17, 2013 at 4:09 p.m.
caddy said...

When is the policeman being disarmed ?

February 18, 2013 at 10:35 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.