Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/11/2003 8:04:03 PM EDT
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/alerts/reader/0,2061,567203,00.html

You've been SERIOUSLY warned!

CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:10:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 8:28:01 PM EDT by _DR]
like the Republicans are going to stop the next ban...they are all whores for special interest groups, soccer moms and whatever ethnic groups they think they can get to vote for them. They voted for the last one or it wouldn't have passed, temporary or not. And the NRA doesn't give a crap about military style rifles. I am so sick of hearing about how the DC sniper used an "assault rifle" to kill his victims. It could just have easily been a .223 deer rifle.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:24:15 PM EDT
What frustrates me the most is the fact that they use the DC shootings to justify the strengthened ban when the shooter could have done the same thing with a bolt gun.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:29:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 8:30:43 PM EDT by _DR]
exactly. They (anti gun rights people)just don't get it. Most are Democrats, but I know plenty of urban republicans who are anti-gun as well. you would be surprised. most are just ignorant of what the constitution guarantees and "go with the flow".
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:35:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Bradd_D: What frustrates me the most is the fact that they use the DC shootings to justify the strengthened ban when the shooter could have done the same thing with a bolt gun.
View Quote
But he didn't. And they want to ban bolt rifles too. CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:36:52 PM EDT
Here's the email I sent to that organization: [b]I have a few questions regarding a story on your alerts and announcements page. If H.R. 2038 bans weapons such as the one used by the DC sniper, would someone else not be able to accomplish the same thing with a single shot bolt action rifle? After all, only one shot was fired at each victim, correct? What role did the "assault rifle" play in the shootings? How was it any more effective than the typical hunting rifle? Personally, I think it's sad that your organization is using the DC shootings to push your agenda when the weapon used had no bearing on the outcome of the shootings. Can you not win the fight without playing dirty pool and disseminating misinformation? Thanks for your time, Bradd Douglass[/b]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:55:02 PM EDT
Sorry to say this Brad, but here is a picture of your letters new display case. [img]http://www.bettymills.com/store/images/product/WRUB0305.JPG[/img] They don't want your logic confusing the issu.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 9:13:53 PM EDT
Yeah...I know, but I was pissed. [:D]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 9:58:42 PM EDT
what i want to know, is how they can logically explain how stopping manufacture of NEW guns, will get all guns off the street? WTF? That makes no sense! Banning the manufacture of vehicles does not ban the use of a vehicle! To ban crime, you ban criminals. <-- Failproof As for "Military style assault weapons.." Big fucking deal. Whats wrong with playing army? If we ban military style guns, we also need to ban camo pants/shirts, army boots, shirts with "ARMY" on it, HUMMERS, canteens, helmets, we also need to shut down ROTC, Civil Air Patrol, Sea Cadets. They are all military style objects or organizations and have no use in society. All i have to say to those who want to void the Bill of Rights is: "...go home and die." For a good laugh here is a video of GWB giving a speech http://www.ebaumsworld.com/presaddress.html
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 10:02:19 PM EDT
The party system is too general. You have to look beyond party lines and vote for Conservativism. Liberalism is the enemy. Our constitution is supposed to limit what the government can do, yet it's arm reaches further everyday.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 10:07:21 PM EDT
_DR, The anti gun rights people do get it? The only way for them to win is to get people all wound up about it and to put blame. The DC sniper deal was perfect for them, just hope someone doesn't go wild in a school anywhere close to the election. If the shooters were killing people with civil war muskets they would say "see look how bad those military weapons are, their is no reason for someone to own one". Anything they can use they will and the more in the spotlight or the more that tugs at people the better for them. The facts don't matter to them as long as they continue to take our guns away from us.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 4:47:40 AM EDT
Maybe we should try to ban liberals.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 7:45:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jshooter: Maybe we should try to ban liberals.
View Quote
I try to do that very thing everytime I vote. Sadly, DR is correct... most politicians are "whores" with their own self-interests as their priority instead of their constituents' best interests. This is especially true in urban areas. In Wisconsin, our state is "controlled" by two cities, Madison and Milwaukee... it's like the rest of the state (primarily rural) doesn't matter! Oh yeah, this is an AR discussion. I heard a quote recently (don't know from where), "Every politician needs a target." Sadly, our ARs are targets for several politicians' personal gains. Scot
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 4:52:10 PM EDT
The reason that they go forward with bans is becouse we assault weapon owners dont take enough of a stand.It is just like schools I found out tonight at church that in California the kids are being taught from kindergarden through 12TH. that homosexuality is ok and good.If a stand is not taken before we know it they will be teaching that in all states.The same goes for guns if a stand is not taken state by state they will turn the rest of the USA like Ca. has been changed and if CA. doesnt take a stand it will get worse.I dont know the best way to go about this but unless we do something soon it will be to late.Like it says in the BIBLE "let a man who has no sword sell his coat and get one".And what happened to the second ammendant any way are we just going to sit around and let them take it away.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 5:50:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 5:51:11 PM EDT by model927]
If we ban liberals we have to come up with a list of features that make them illegal,like I say let them have muzzle devices so we dont have to hear them.And then maybe sew their mouths shut so the cannot except detachable propaganda.And let them have only 1 banned feature.Maybe let them have a colspaseable bladder so theyll be running to the toilet so much they wont have time to push their social utopian agenda.And no bayonet lug because....well they voted on us not having them so they cant either.And prevent them from stock piling tax payer money in the form of pay raises they pass at midnight while the whole country sleeps.And limit their speaches to no more than 10 sentences any thing over would violate the High Capacity mouth spewing bull shit law.And also cannot speak faster than 20 words a minute or violate the 2003 Machine Mouth act unless your mouth is registered and forehead stamped with a class 3 moron stamp.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 6:56:33 PM EDT
[LOLabove]
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 7:34:03 PM EDT
[LOLabove][LOLabove]
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 7:47:35 PM EDT
the gun industry continues to manufacture "post-ban" assault weapons - guns identical to those banned except for minor cosmetic changes.
View Quote
WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!? NOW THEY ARE BITCHING ABOUT COSMETIC CHANGES????? WAAAYYYYY TO OMIT THAT IT WAS THEIR IDEA!
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 11:36:36 PM EDT
Im joining the AACK. Americans against Car Killing. It seems that these are just as deadly as guns if not more but you don't see people crying over all of these "assualt cars" that can go way faster than nessary to get them to soccer practice. BEGONE LOGIC!!!! I BANISH YOU FROM THE MINDS OF ALL DEMOCRATS AND SHEEPLE!!!!!!!!!!!! ::Scarcasim gland returning to normal size:: Ok, I'm sane again. JIM
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 12:32:06 AM EDT
Wait, it's not the cars that are dangerous. It is what MAKES those cars dangerous. If we restrict things like wheels/tires, and bumpers. We can keep the deadly versions of these "assault cars" off the streets. We would all be safe then.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 2:22:51 AM EDT
It's not the car... IT'S THE DRIVER, the person behind the wheel... It's not the gun... IT'S THE SHOOTER, the person behind the trigger... The DC Sniper's are f**ked in the head, but guess what, they'll attack the guns, and find some way to let these killers off - technicalities, or poor childhood, society must bear the blame for their frustrations... [Democrat]"If we'd have doled out more money to them via social programs and hand-outs, then maybe they wouldn't have gone on a killing spree - it's our fault, and wouldn't have happened if those damned guns weren't around..."[/Democrat] That's what's wrong with our society - no one is responsible anymore for things they do... Who's fault was it, that a chad was left dangling on the ballot??? Wasn't the polling place, or machines??? wasn't the candidates??? Nope, wasn't the judges... It was the f**king voter - the numb nuts... [sniper2]
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 2:53:13 AM EDT
If you ban guns crime won`t go away. over 3000 poeple were killed on 9/11 and not one single gun was used did it make them feel better? I just don`t get it!
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:08:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Cutter75: [Democrat]"If we'd have doled out more money to them via social programs and hand-outs, then maybe they wouldn't have gone on a killing spree - it's our fault, and wouldn't have happened if those damned guns weren't around..."[/Democrat] •••••• True, If the "sniper" turned out to be Chief Moose's white-guy-in-a-white-van, the anti AWB propaganda would've been in full swing ever since. But because the killers were black and the investigation was fumbled by an ultra liberal black cop married to an ultra liberal hates-her-own-race white woman, they've been slow to gear up and of course, it's hard for them to blather 'bout "redneck miltia wackos". CKMorley
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:24:20 AM EDT
I just love how the author refers to the "...willful attempt to violate the spirit of the law, the gun industry continues to manufacture "post-ban" assault weapons - guns identical to those banned except for minor cosmetic changes." Why doen't anyone ever mention the congressman's willful attempt to violate the Constition of the United States?
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 11:31:48 AM EDT
sad enough for me to say this, but i am a democrate. I am one of very few that actually has a brain. Even though i am a democrate, i will always vote against someone who is for banning guns of any kind. If they get the "Assualt weapons" then its hand guns, hunting rifles, and shot guns next on the list. Once those are all banned, no need for cops to carry guns if they are all banned right. At that point, what is to stop an criminal that has an illegal firearm from walking into my house, killing me, knowing i am not armed, and the police are not armed. Im sorry, Its very possible i am here today because of a firearm. I have delt with uninvited guests that have broken into my house with the intent to steal. And that person had a past of harming the indivuals inside there home before. So i ask this. Leave it at Liberals. MY family is democratic, but my whole family has spent, and still spends times converting stupid people to agree, guns are a nessity in today society. By the way, the only way to stop crime is to actually punish people for it. If you kill someone, you can look forward to 3 meals a day, a warm bed, and cable tv. Probably more then they had before they were sent to prison.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 12:56:45 PM EDT
I think its not an issue of DEMOCRAT or REPUBLICAN but more like LIBERAL and CONSERVATIVE..So lets vote conservative no matter the party afiliation you have liberal democrats and republicans"swarzenegger"you just have to know how they stand on one issue...The right to keep and bear arms,and vote accordingly.............NO MORE COMPROMISE..we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights and the second ammendment is one of 10.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 5:57:18 PM EDT
OUTLAW CHEVROLETS!!! After all the shooters were in the trunk of a Caprice.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 6:12:29 PM EDT
Better still, outlaw cars with trunks, no matter WHO makes them! And let's outlaw any tool that can be used to make a hole in a trunk, too! But wait, there's more! Let's outlaw any tool that can be used to make a tool that can be used to make a hole in a trunk! Let's put so much thought and effort into this because it's fun and sensational, rather than the simple and more effective approach of just prosecuting criminals more aggressively, giving them stiffer sentences, and not letting them out early. That'd be boring and wouldn't get any extra votes. CJ
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:40:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: Better still, outlaw cars with trunks, no matter WHO makes them! And let's outlaw any tool that can be used to make a hole in a trunk, too! But wait, there's more! Let's outlaw any tool that can be used to make a tool that can be used to make a hole in a trunk! Let's put so much thought and effort into this because it's fun and sensational, rather than the simple and more effective approach of just prosecuting criminals more aggressively, giving them stiffer sentences, and not letting them out early. That'd be boring and wouldn't get any extra votes. CJ
View Quote
I'm with ya CJ... We can make the manufacturers of machines that make tools to make holes in trunks of cars [b]liable[/b], and they could actually be prosecuted as accessories to murder... [sniper2]
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 9:00:08 PM EDT
You guys are bending the needle on my dumbass detector. [:)] I try hard to think about this mainly around election time. I don't want to water down the effects with constant exposure. Don't you just love statements of "absolute fact" followed by an example that consists of some liberal's blatantly biased opinion. "cop killers", "weapon of choice" Blort!
Top Top