Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 09:47:33 am Here we go again...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/reports-connecticut-police-evacuating-elementary-school-where-shooting-153815107.html Reports: Connecticut police evacuating elementary school where shooting reported State police are entering a Connecticut elementary school after a shooting was reported there. The building, Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Conn., is on lockdown and police are evacuating people inside the building, NBC Connecticut reports. Connecticut's News 8 WTNH-TV says a witness saw one child with a bloody face leaving the building. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 12:14:56 pm Oh boy, this is WORSE than Columbine... :-[
http://fox40.com/2012/12/14/close-to-20-people-killed-in-connecticut-elementary-school-shooting/ CNN) — The suspected gunman’s body was found in a classroom inside a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school where authorities say as many as 20 were killed, including 10 children, a source close to the investigation told CNN’s Susan Candiotti. More information to come. Keep checking FOX40.com. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 01:13:05 pm http://www.infosalvo.com/us-news/newton-connecticut-elementary-shooting-is-a-staged-false-flag/
Newton Connecticut Elementary Shooting Is A Staged False Flag by Matt McCarson | InfoSalvo.com At least 27 people were murdered (including 18 children) at Newton Elementary in Connecticut Friday during a staged false glag attack against our guns when multiple shooters were initially reported opening up fire in an elementary school resulting in one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history. This comes after a series of shooting rampages spreading across the country taking place in mostly white, suburban areas. Within minutes of the reported shooting CNN had a police officer on calling for neurological screening for firearm purchases. Witnesses report at least 100 rounds were fired inside of the school from 2 gunmen. One of the gunmen was reported killed and the other was arrested in the woods just outside of the school. The one shooter in custody was reported to have multiple weapons and body armour according to fox news. CNN reports the gunman looked directly at one of the parents while being escorted to a police car and said "I DID NOT DO IT". The first shooter will no doubt be dubbed the lone shooter, will be framed with the 3 name mind control tag, and paraded on the news as the lone nut as the military psy ops land a direct hit on our second amendment. There will no doubt be more shootings to frame gun owning americans as Fox News leaves us with the premonition stating "..unfortunately when these kindergarten shootings get started THERE WILL BE OTHERS". Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 03:07:31 pm InfoSalvo.com
need a disclaimer for that AJ shock jock stuff. thi swas NO False Flag. Thanx AJ for making crazies all over the place. ::) Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 03:20:29 pm Well, either way, this will be used by the NWO to further their agendas on gun control. Didn't Obama make a speech over this incident not too long ago? Recently you had the Bob Costas remarks on the NBC SNF halftime show, and then the Baltimore Ravens Terrell Suggs got his guns taken away over an unrelated law he broke.
Ultimately, I don't think everyone's guns will be taken away by force - when things start going from bad to worse(economically, etc), this is when gun owners could be tempted to give their guns away for a piece of bread, etc. Alot like how churches of today kicked out the KJV...b/c they were seduced by all these beautiful-looking perverted bibles on the market(ie-the teen NIV study bible, cartoon-made bible stories for kids, etc). Proverbs_12:26 The righteous is more excellent than his neighbour: but the way of the wicked seduceth them. Rev_2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 03:25:03 pm Social media networking, again... ::)
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-control-debate-erupts-twitter-195914529.html The horrific shooting at the Newtown, Conn., elementary school that left multiple people dead, including, it's believed, 20 children, has re-ignited the gun control debate. Commenters took to Twitter to express their views, pro and con. Trending topics on Twitter included "2nd Amendment," "NRA" and "Columbine"—a reference to the mass shooting at Columbine High School in Columbine, Colo., in 1999. Ross McCall (@maccageezer) wrote, "Senseless. The 2nd Amendment is NOT what it was originally set up to be. HAS to be more gun control." Daniel Stewart @dnstewart67 tweeted, "Any American who would prefer to see this on their TV rather than lose the 2nd amendment have no humanity. Sheer horror." Comedian Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman) wrote, "Band-Aids-on-Band-Aids @NRA people want MORE access to guns to combat all the people w access to guns." Mediaite tweeted about MSNBC host's Andrea Mitchell's editorializing on air, who said, "When we talk about gun violence in this country, we're not talking about Second Amendment rights." She also called gun violence an "epidemic." Filmmaker Michael Moore (@MMFlint), who made a documentary about the Columbine school shooting, "Bowling for Columbine," tweeted, "Too soon to speak out about a gun-crazy nation? No, too late. At least THIRTY-ONE school shootings since Columbine." Assif Manvi (@aasif) of "The Daily Show," posted, "The #NRA politicians will now tell us that this tragedy could have been prevented if children carried guns! #WAKEUPAMERICA." Plenty of people also defended gun rights. SamEwinks (@SamEwinks), for instance, wrote, "The only gun reform we need is to allow people the ability to defend themselves, not provide nut jobs with easy targets #nra." josefsmith2011 (@josefsmith2011) posted, "Guns don't kill people people do! Practice the 2nd amendment—keep your gun loaded with you at all times—the younger you are the better." And Cutty (@LilCutty) tweeted, "Changing the 2nd Amendment wont stop ppl from doin foolishness." Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 03:25:47 pm no doubt about that, they even have Gabby Giffords husband making a plea for more gun laws. The only gun law they really need is to force everyone to carry a gun. I bet a lot less kids would have died if the teachers were armed. another 1 or 2 gun laws wouldnt have stopped this guy.
Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 03:31:15 pm no doubt about that, they even have Gabby Giffords husband making a plea for more gun laws. The only gun law they really need is to force everyone to carry a gun. I bet a lot less kids would have died if the teachers were armed. another 1 or 2 gun laws wouldnt have stopped this guy. And remember the "Brady Bill" passed under Reagan - of course, that guy who tried to assassinate Reagan had "Catcher in the Rye" in his back pocket at the time(this book was written by a former CIA agent, who specialized in the mind control area - but this is a completely different subject of itself elsewhere). Either way that law didn't help one iota either. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 03:52:10 pm 22 children slashed by knife-wielding adult at elementary school in China...
http://www.courant.com/sns-rt-us-china-stabbingsbre8bd065-20121213,0,5592318.story where is the outcry for KNIFE control and laws? Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:24:49 pm 22 children slashed by knife-wielding adult at elementary school in China... http://www.courant.com/sns-rt-us-china-stabbingsbre8bd065-20121213,0,5592318.story where is the outcry for KNIFE control and laws? Didn't OJ Simpson use a knife to commit his crimes? Wasn't OJ and Bob Costas partners in the NBC broadcasting boot for awhile? Wasn't Costas the same guy who make some anti-gun comments recently? Just saying... Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:30:26 pm InfoSalvo.com need a disclaimer for that AJ shock jock stuff. thi swas NO False Flag. Thanx AJ for making crazies all over the place. ::) Good disclaimer! Although wanted to point out that FOX News DID make this comment(which was heard over the live feed link)... Fox News leaves us with the premonition stating "..unfortunately when these kindergarten shootings get started THERE WILL BE OTHERS". http://www.livestream.com/foxct Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 04:33:47 pm Quote MEDS? Shooter was autistic and had 'personality disorder'... Neighbors described man to ABCNEWS as 'odd' and displaying characteristics associated with obsessive-compulsive disorder... MORE... http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/live-updates-newtown-ct-school-shooting/ ABC is usually wrong in their reporting. Im really hoping they are wrong here also. As they would love to make it illegal for anyone with a mental disorder to own a weapon. Than it comes down to just what a mental disorder is, and who says who has one. The UN tries this every couple of years, and there was a push not to long ago to make Christians into having a mental disorder, when we all know its democrats that have a mental disorder. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:37:19 pm ^^
From my experiences with people with AS(mild autism), yeah, they can get angry and pretty wild(and even physically hit others and throw things around), but NEVER, NEVER do they go to the level of THIS kind of violence. This is just SO hogwash. >:( Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:39:17 pm http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/live-updates-newtown-ct-school-shooting/ ABC is usually wrong in their reporting. Im really hoping they are wrong here also. As they would love to make it illegal for anyone with a mental disorder to own a weapon. Than it comes down to just what a mental disorder is, and who says who has one. The UN tries this every couple of years, and there was a push not to long ago to make Christians into having a mental disorder, when we all know its democrats that have a mental disorder. Well, the same can be said for Freemasons, 'cuz with all the rituals et al they perform in their lodges, they are spiritually DRUNK(this type of drunkenness the bible warns alot about as well). Throw in all of the Purpose Driven/Emergent member churches around the globe for that matter too, especially with all of this contemplative prayer deception they're fooling around with, Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:41:51 pm BTW - Autism/AS is REALLY not a mental disorder, why? B/c it largely has to do with the food/beverage intake, as their digestive systems are out of wack. I've read stories where 7 year old kids were maintained OK after they were fed the proper diets. Remember Jesus Christ distinctly separated sickness and devil possession.
Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:42:25 pm CNN’s Piers Morgan Calls for Immediate Handgun Ban as Gun Control Shills Seek to Exploit Mass Shooting Tradegy
By Alex Thomas theintelhub.com December 14, 2012 Just minutes after the news broke that a shooter in his 20′s had opened fire at an elementary school in Connecticut, noted gun control advocate and CNN primetime host Piers Morgan began tweeting calls for stricter gun control. As most of the country set glued to their TV or computer screen watching the horror unfold on TV, Morgan began posting a series of tweets that, among other things, implied the need for an across the board handgun ban. This is America’s Dunblane. We banned handguns in Britain after that appalling tragedy. What will the U.S. do? Inaction not an option.— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 14, 2012 The fact that the host of a CNN primetime show would openly call for the outright destruction of one of America’s most prized freedoms just goes to show how deep the bankster globalist take over goes. Not wanting to stop after calling for what would amount to the end of the Second Amendment, Morgan, showing his complete disdain for everything American, then published a series of tweets that challenged Obama and others to EXPLOIT this tragedy to implement gun control. Piers Morgan @piersmorgan – White House spokesman Jay Carney’s right – today’s not the day to debate gun control. YESTERDAY was the day to debate it. Piers Morgan @piersmorgan – Don’t just mourn these poor dead children America – get angry and do something to stop these senseless shootings happening. Piers Morgan @piersmorgan - Any moment now, a gun nut will tweet me saying ‘If all the kids in that school had been armed, the shooters would have been stopped…’ (a clear-cut fallacy as no one would claim the kids need to be armed, rather the adults in the school should have been armed) Piers Morgan @piersmorgan -Last 2yrs: movie theatres, shopping malls, temples, a congresswoman, now an elementary school – when will America deal with its gun madness? Piers Morgan @piersmorgan - Another day, another horrific shooting – this time at an elementary school in Connecticut. America’s gun culture has to change. Piers Morgan @piersmorgan -This is now President Obama’s biggest test – will he have the courage to stand up to the American gun lobby? Piers Morgan @piersmorgan -No more weasly words of ‘comfort’ Mr President. This is the latest, and worst, gun outrage on your watch. Time to act. #GunControl As you can see, Morgan has absolutely no problem exploiting this horrible tragedy for his own political agenda which just so happens to include disarming the American people, a move that WILL, in turn, lead to many deaths as well as the possibility that our government could easily attack the people with little to no consequences. The fact that there has been so many shootings in the last two years just as calls for gun control are gaining ground is simply too perfect to be a coincidence. The gun control lobby and their globalist backers could very easily be using MK Ultra type mind control on the numerous “lone gunman” who have committed horrific acts of murder which are then used to call for the banning of firearms for law-abiding citizens. The gun control that Piers Morgan and the rest of the out of control gun control lobby want would literally take guns out of YOUR hands and put them into the hands of criminals throughout the country. The fact of the matter is that criminals do not purchase guns legally and the vast majority of murders are NOT carried about by citizens who have guns registered in their own name. While some of the past mass shooting lone gunman, including the Connecticut shooter, may have obtained their weapons legally, this doesn’t change the fact that law-abiding citizens have a god given right to legally purchase and have firearms that can’t be taken away or limited due to the actions of a very small minority. It is also important to note that one of the main reasons we have a 2nd Amendment is because the BRITISH didn’t allow private gun ownership and, after fighting for and obtaining our freedom from the hands of the corrupt British Monarchy, our founding fathers KNEW it was very important that the public had the right to bare arms in the case that they were ever needed to fight back against an out of control government. That’s right, we now have what many believe to be a British agent with a primetime show in America that has gone on the offensive against the US Constitution and the 2nd amendment in particular. Although many Americans already consider CNN to be nothing more than a propaganda outlet, these tweets and startling call for a handgun ban by one of their primetime hosts directly shows that they are anything but unbiased in their pro-government, pro liberal coverage. http://theintelhub.com/2012/12/14/cnns-piers-morgan-calls-for-immediate-handgun-ban-as-gun-control-shills-seek-to-exploit-mass-shooting-tradegy/ Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 04:44:02 pm BTW - Autism/AS is REALLY not a mental disorder, why? B/c it largely has to do with the food/beverage intake, as their digestive systems are out of wack. I've read stories where 7 year old kids were maintained OK after they were fed the proper diets. Remember Jesus Christ distinctly separated sickness and devil possession. uhm, thats not true, not true at all. My son only drinks water and occasionaly milk. He doesnt like anything else. and he eats healthy. its the vaccinations, he was fine until then. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 04:52:27 pm uhm, thats not true, not true at all. My son only drinks water and occasionaly milk. He doesnt like anything else. and he eats healthy. its the vaccinations, he was fine until then. That was kind of the point I was trying to get at - for some reason, I didn't finish what I was going to say(sometimes I get my thoughts out too fast). Yes, it's a mental disorder, but at the same time the digestive systems(among other physical parts of the inner body) have alot to do with the functioning as well. Dr. Mercola had on a guest one time, a female doctor, and she talked about how her son got autism b/c she had alot of gut flora. Yes, I understand the vaccines as well. Anyhow - back to the topic of gun control - autism people, from my own experiences, are SCARED of LOUD SOUNDS. They wouldn't even touch a gun with a 10 foot pole, which makes it hard for me to believe this guy had any trace of autism. Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 06:47:40 pm ALEX JONES: 'THE FIX IS IN, THEY'RE COMING FOR OUR GUNS'...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2h1QNTQDnoU Title: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 07:11:22 pm More than 25,000 sign petition calling on Obama administration to address gun control, introduce legislation - whitehouse.gov
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/immediately-address-issue-gun-control-through-introduction-legislation-congress/2tgcXzQC Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 07:22:10 pm some of the devil spawn trying to use this tragedy to push their agenda
US Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg: If we do not take action to address gun violence, shooting tragedies like this will continue. As President Obama said, we must act now 'regardless of the politics.' - statement via @NBCNews Mark Kelly, husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, calls for meaningful discussion about gun laws - statement New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg: The country needs [Obama] to send a bill to Congress to fix this problem. Calling for 'meaningful action' is not enough - @TPM Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York: 'The gloves are off' if President Obama fails to act on gun control - @Politico House Speaker Boehner says Republicans will not offer Saturday radio address to cede time to President Obama - @AP who does that?? http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/politicians-respond-to-connecticut-school-shooting Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 07:34:19 pm You just know its coming from the Godless heathens that HATE the Lord Jesus...
Gal_6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK4Z_ni_zOc My Lord WAS there, He was there with each and every child, He held their hand, He cradled their small bodies, He cried for each and every one of them, and He carried them into a resting place that He prepared. Mat_19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Mat_18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 07:38:07 pm ALEX JONES: 'THE FIX IS IN, THEY'RE COMING FOR OUR GUNS'... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2h1QNTQDnoU More than 25,000 sign petition calling on Obama administration to address gun control, introduce legislation - whitehouse.gov https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/immediately-address-issue-gun-control-through-introduction-legislation-congress/2tgcXzQC Like we discussed here, it probably won't be the case that the government will be breaking down everyone's doors to forcefully take away their guns. Ultimately, when things really start to get bad(ie-economically), that's when gun owners could get very tempted to turn in their guns for a bowl of pottage. It's alot like how alot of churches for the last 3 decades threw out the KJV - it wasn't the IRS that forced it out of their hands, it was the NWO book publishing minions throwing out alot of these beautiful-looking, albeit blasphemous perverted bibles(not just the NIV and NKJV, but all of these "study bibles" by "scholars" like John MacArthur, who denies Jesus's blood saves us). IOW, it was the lusts of their flesh and eyes that drew their hearts away from the KJV. OR - it could be the case that the Illuminati is using this to start a civil war in this country - you have the angry gun control advocates on one end, and the gun rights owners in fear on the other end... Anyhow, have no fear, God is in control. 1John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. 1John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1Jn 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 1Jn 2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 07:51:52 pm Also, notice noone's talking about the "fiscal cliff" now...
Just saying. BTW, thank you Mark, for separating this in its own thread! :) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 07:54:06 pm MURDOCH: 'When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons?'...
This is Rupert Murdoch, Satan worshiping sorry excuse for a human. You would think the head a the worlds biggest media monopoly would already know that Automatic weapons ARE already banned in the US. But what do you expect from the PUBLISHER of the SATANIC BIBLE!!! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 09:49:06 pm MURDOCH: 'When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons?'... This is Rupert Murdoch, Satan worshiping sorry excuse for a human. You would think the head a the worlds biggest media monopoly would already know that Automatic weapons ARE already banned in the US. But what do you expect from the PUBLISHER of the SATANIC BIBLE!!! And the NIV to boot - just saying. Also, watch out for John MacArthur too. While he seems to be widely respected by some of the end times discernment ministries AND some of the end times watchers(especially his exposes he does on the Emergent Church), he too has some of his his "study bibles" and books published by Zonderfan. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 09:53:43 pm Also, remember over 13 years ago when Columbine happened, and almost immediately alot of these pro-family/media watchdog groups were jumping all over the harms of violence in the media(The Matrix and the video game Doom were the ones they were calling out). Sure, I probably would have done the same thing too, but nonetheless...where are John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, Lynne Cheney, and all of these pro-family groups NOW? ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 14, 2012, 10:03:27 pm didnt you get the message? music and Hollywood doesn't hurt anyone.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 14, 2012, 10:11:59 pm didnt you get the message? music and Hollywood doesn't hurt anyone. I know, pretty much they were playing out the Hegelian Dialect then(media watchdog groups vs. gun control advocate groups). It wasn't too long after that when they starting releasing alot of these subtle, supernatural witcraft movies(ie-The Sixth Sense was released only months later, and became one of the biggest box office sleeper hits ever - very little buzz before its release, but ended up packing theaters). And you know the rest of the story from there(ie-the Harry Potter, Twilight, etc movies getting released almost every year). As for this Lt. Col. Dave Grossman guy - he just came out of nowhere. He was profiled on "60 Minutes", he flew around the country lecturing to PTA meetings 6 days a week and gave radio interviews, and of course he *claimed* to be a Christian. While he spoke some truth about violence in the media, at the same time he knew how to stir up parents's emotions(stirring up emotions - Jesuits are very good at this). Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on December 15, 2012, 02:45:13 am didnt you get the message? music and Hollywood doesn't hurt anyone. i dont know if Your being serious or not but i would say that there are definitely spirits behind secular music and Hollywood and these spirits encourage people to watch n listen to these things, it is a counterfeit to hymns and preaching the Gospel, i'm not saying Your comment was void just clarifying this thats all. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 15, 2012, 03:46:47 am He was being sarcastic. ;)
The unnerving thing about this shooting, firstly, it was little kids. As shocking as that is, it doesn't surprise me they'd go to these extremes to get what they want. They will do whatever it takes to jolt a response out of the public and get them fired up on a topic, like gun control, and to distract the public from other major issues currently going on, like the fiscal cliff thing. And Terrel Suggs, didn't have his guns taken, he voluntarily gave them up. Also, OJ did not kill those people with a knife. OJ didn't kill anybody. Somebody used a knife on them, but it wasn't OJ. He may have some issues but I don't believe for a second he did it. I believe he was set up because the case was an easy, "The black guy did it". If you remember, that detective Mark Furman was singled out as being a racist, but they blew it off and tried to ignore it. The wife and I watch a lot of the crime shows about real cases, and from what I've seen on those shows about real murder cases, only the really sick homicidal manics serial killer types commit such gruesome murders with such rage. And it's actually rather rare a killer goes to such extreme to do so much damage as they did to Simpson and Goldman. Your "average" domestic killing doesn't end up like that did at all. It's a crime of passion in the moment, a lashing out and it's quick, usually a gun shot or a knife stabbing that happens to kill the person. What happened with the Simpson murder doesn't fit a crime of passion between ex-mates. That killing was full on murderous rage. If they had just broke up, MAYBE he might lose it. but they had been separated for some time. Ron Goldman was just an employee at a restaurant, an innocent by-stander of sorts, in the wrong place and the wrong time. Anyway, I get your point. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 09:49:58 am http://news.yahoo.com/police-world-wonder-conn-shooting-motive-080207412.html
12/15/12 Police, world wonder about Conn. shooting motive NEWTOWN, Conn. (AP) — The massacre of 26 children and adults at a Connecticut elementary school elicited horror and soul-searching around the world even as it raised more basic questions about why the gunman, a 20-year-old described as brilliant but remote, was driven to such a crime and how he chose his victims. Investigators were trying to learn more about Adam Lanza and questioned his older brother, who was not believed to have been involved in the rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary. Police shed no light on the motive for the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. In tight-knit Newtown on Friday night, hundreds of people packed St. Rose of Lima Church and stood outside in a vigil for the 28 dead — 20 children and six adults at the school, the gunman's mother at home, and the gunman himself, who committed suicide. People held hands, lit candles and sang "Silent Night." "These 20 children were just beautiful, beautiful children," Monsignor Robert Weiss said. "These 20 children lit up this community better than all these Christmas lights we have. ... There are a lot brighter stars up there tonight because of these kids." Lanza is believed to have suffered from a personality disorder and lived with his mother, said a law enforcement official who was briefed on the investigation. Lanza shot his mother, Nancy Lanza, drove to the school in her car with at least three of her guns, and opened fire in two classrooms around 9:30 a.m. Friday, law enforcement officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. A custodian ran through the halls, warning of a gunman, and someone switched on the intercom, perhaps saving many lives by letting them hear the chaos in the school office, a teacher said. Teachers locked their doors and ordered children to huddle in a corner, duck under their desks or hide in closets as shots reverberated through the building. The well-liked principal, Dawn Hochsprung, was believed to be among the dead. A woman who worked at the school was wounded. Maryann Jacob, a clerk in the school library, was in there with 18 fourth-graders when they heard a commotion and gunfire outside the room. She had the youngsters crawl into a storage room, and they locked the door and barricaded it with a file cabinet. There happened to be materials for coloring, "so we set them up with paper and crayons." After what she guessed was about an hour, officers came to the door and knocked, but those inside couldn't be sure it was the police. "One of them slid his badge under the door, and they called and said, 'It's OK, it's the police,'" she said. A law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity said investigators believe Lanza attended the school several years ago but appeared to have no recent connection to it. It was not clear whether he held a job. At least one parent said Lanza's mother was a substitute teacher at the school. But her name did not appear on a staff list. And the official said investigators were unable to establish any connection so far between her and the school. Lanza's older brother, 24-year-old Ryan Lanza, of Hoboken, N.J., was questioned, and investigators searched his computers and phone records, but he told law enforcement he had not been in touch with his brother since about 2010. For about two hours late Friday and early Saturday, clergy members and emergency vehicles moved steadily to and from the school. The state medical examiner's office said bodies of the victims would be taken there for autopsies. The gunman entered the kindergarten-through-fourth-grade school through the front door, and authorities are looking into the possibility that he shattered glass next to it to get in, police said. He took three guns into the school — a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both semiautomatic pistols, and a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, according to an official who was not authorized to discuss information with reporters and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The weapons were registered to his slain mother. Lanza and his mother lived in a well-to-do part of prosperous Newtown, about 60 miles northeast of New York City, where neighbors are doctors or hold white-collar positions at companies such as General Electric, Pepsi and IBM. His parents filed for divorce in 2008, according to court records. His father, Peter Lanza, lives in Stamford, Conn., and works as a tax director for GE. The gunman's aunt Marsha Lanza, of Crystal Lake, Ill., said her nephew was raised by kind, nurturing parents who would not have hesitated to seek mental help for him if he needed it. "Nancy wasn't one to deny reality," Marsha Lanza said, adding her husband had seen Adam as recently as June and recalled nothing out of the ordinary. Catherine Urso, of Newtown, said her college-age son knew the killer. "He just said he was very thin, very remote and was one of the goths," she said. Lanza attended Newtown High School, and several news clippings from recent years mention his name among the honor roll students. Joshua Milas, who graduated from Newtown High in 2009 and belonged to the school technology club with him, said that Lanza was generally a happy person but that he hadn't seen him in a few years. "We would hang out, and he was a good kid. He was smart," Joshua Milas said. "He was probably one of the smartest kids I know. He was probably a genius." The mass shooting is one of the deadliest in U.S. history, and among school attacks is second in victims only to the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, which left 33 people dead, including the gunman. Reaction was swift and emotional in Newtown, a picturesque New England community of 27,000 people, as well as across the country and around the world. "It has to stop, these senseless deaths," said Frank DeAngelis, principal of Colorado's Columbine High School, where a massacre in 1999 killed 15 people. In Washington, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence organized a vigil at the White House, with some protesters chanting, "Today IS the day" to take steps to curb gun violence. In New York's Times Square, a few dozen people held tea lights in plastic cups, with one woman holding a sign that read: "Take a moment and candle to remember the victims of the Newtown shooting." President Barack Obama's comments on the tragedy amounted to one of the most outwardly emotional moments of his presidency. "The majority of those who died were children — beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old," Obama said at a White House news briefing. He paused for several seconds to keep his composure as he teared up and wiped an eye. Nearby, two aides cried and held hands. Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard described the attack as a "senseless and incomprehensible act of evil." "Like President Obama and his fellow Americans, our hearts too are broken," Gillard said in a statement. In Japan, where guns are severely restricted and there are extremely few gun-related crimes, the attack led the news two days before parliamentary elections. In China, which has seen several knife rampages at schools in recent years, the attack quickly consumed public discussion. In Newtown, Robert Licata said his 6-year-old son was in class when the gunman burst in and shot the teacher. "That's when my son grabbed a bunch of his friends and ran out the door," he said. "He was very brave. He waited for his friends." He said the shooter didn't utter a word. Kaitlin Roig, a teacher at the school, said she implored her students to be quiet. "I told them we had to be absolutely quiet. Because I was just so afraid if he did come in, then he would hear us and just start shooting the door. I said we have to be absolutely quiet. And I said there are bad guys out there now and we need to wait for the good guys to come get us out," Roig told ABC News. "If they started crying, I would take their face and say, 'It's going to be OK. Show me your smile,'" she said. "They said, 'We want to go home for Christmas. Yes, yeah. I just want to hug my mom.' Things like that, that were just heartbreaking." Title: Gun control petition clears White House response threshold Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 11:00:26 am http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gun-control-petition-clears-white-house-response-threshold-232717126--politics.html
12/14/12 A petition calling on President Barack Obama to push for new gun control laws in the aftermath of the mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., has cleared the 25,000-signature threshold required to obtain a formal White House response. The measure, filed in response to Friday's massacre, urges Obama to "immediately address the issue of gun control through the introduction of legislation in Congress." "The goal of this petition is to force the Obama Administration to produce legislation that limits access to guns," it says. "While a national dialogue is critical, laws are the only means in which we can reduce the number of people murdered in gun related deaths." Obama vowed on Friday to "take meaningful action, regardless of the politics," to prevent future tragedies like the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School. "Our hearts are broken today," Obama said in a brief statement in the White House briefing room, frequently pausing to wipe tears from his eyes. "The majority of those who died today were children, beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. They had their entire lives ahead of them: birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own. Among the fallen were also teachers, men and women who devoted their lives to helping our children fulfill their dreams." His comments came shortly after White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters that "today's not the day" to push for gun control laws. The petitioners plainly disagreed. "Powerful lobbying groups allow the ownership of guns to reach beyond the Constitution's intended purpose of the right to bear arms. Therefore, Congress must act on what is stated law, and face the reality that access to firearms reaches beyond what the Second Amendment intends to achieve," the measure urges. "The signatures on this petition represent a collective demand for a bipartisan discussion resulting in a set of laws that regulates how a citizen obtains a gun," it says. . Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 02:17:46 pm Mat 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Mat 24:8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 05:03:41 pm Father of Alleged Connecticut Shooter is VP of GE Capital According to Reports
15 December 2012, by Jack Blood (Deadline Live) http://deadlinelive.info/2012/12/15/father-of-alleged-connecticut-shooter-is-vp-of-ge-capital-according-to-reports/#respond Echos of the Batman Massacre – James Holmes father a high priest of computer economics at FICO – Allegedly investigating the LIBOR scandal which has indeed faded after the Aurora shootings… GE Capital is onwed by GE – yeah THAT GE that operates outside of the law! Founded by JP Morgan to corner the market in electricity (stolen Tesla patents) – GE is now a media – military industrial complex kingpin! Morgan Stanley has also been implicated in the LIBOR Scandal! Lanza’s father was “questioned by Police” According to Yahoo news, the alleged shooter at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, Adam Lanza, is the son of Vice President of GE Capital, Peter Lanza. Peter Lanza is also a partner at Ernst & Young, and major accounting firm. The older brother, Ryan Lanza, is also reported to be employed at Ernst & Young. Peter Lanza, who drove to northern New Jersey to talk to police and the FBI, is a vice president at GE Capital and had been a partner at global accounting giant Ernst & Young. Adam’s older brother Ryan Lanza, 24, has worked at Ernst & Young for four years, apparently following in his father’s footsteps and carving out a solid niche in the tax practice. He too was interviewed by the FBI. Neither he nor his father is under any suspicion. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 15, 2012, 05:13:53 pm Dem. lawmaker: To get gun control, Obama must ‘exploit’ shooting
A veteran Democratic lawmaker believes the nation will go along with stronger gun control laws if President Obama “exploits” the Newtown, Conn., tragedy and nudges Congress to action. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who represents portions of New York City, said he was encouraged by Mr. Obama’s statement on Friday afternoon that the mass shooting, which claimed the lives of 20 young children, requires “meaningful action” by Congress, but hopes those words turn into concrete legislation. “These incidents, these horrible, horrible incidents … are happening more and more frequently. And they will continue to happen more and more frequently until someone with the bully pulpit, and that means the president, takes leadership and pushes Congress,” Mr. Nadler said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show” with Ed Schultz. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/14/dem-lawmaker-get-gun-control-obama-must-exploit-sh/#ixzz2FAJ8ikcy Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 06:45:55 pm Reports: Nancy Lanza Wasn’t A Teacher At Sandy Hook Elementary
by Anjali Sareen | 11:08 am, December 15th, 2012 http://www.mediaite.com/online/reports-nancy-lanza-wasnt-a-teacher-at-sandy-hook-elementary/ Despite earlier reports that Nancy Lanza, mother of shooter Adam Lanza, was a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School, new details are emerging that suggest otherwise. CNN, The Wall Street Journal, and several other news outlets are reporting now that Nancy Lanza may not have had any connection to the school where the shootings took place. Janet Vollmer, a kindergarten teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary, told CNN that Lanza was not a teacher there. Lillian Bittman, a former school board official, said “no one has heard” of Lanza and that “teachers don’t know her.” Talking Points Memo reports that Lanza is not listed on the Newton School District Website. TPM also notes the origin of the misinformation may have been an AP story which quoted law enforcement officials “speaking on the condition of anonymity” about Lanza’s possible connection to school. Other sources, such as The New York Times and Washington Post, each still have stories claiming Lanza was a teacher Sandy Hook Elementary. At this time, the Sandy Hook Police have not commented on Nancy Lanza’s possible involvement in the school, if any. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on December 15, 2012, 11:09:08 pm i'm hoping to get the real truth about this tragedy, what the motivations were for this killer because it seems to me that some things are hard to believe. And they will use this event to bring in tougher gun controls, that is possible.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 16, 2012, 08:28:15 am i'm hoping to get the real truth about this tragedy, what the motivations were for this killer because it seems to me that some things are hard to believe. And they will use this event to bring in tougher gun controls, that is possible. Honestly, I haven't been keeping up too much with this b/c there's so much CONFUSION coming out. One minute it's this way, the other minute it's that way, etc, etc. But I'll say this again, there's NO WAY this shooter had autism, b/c while autism people have angry and violent tendencies, their angry and violent tendencies go NO FURTHER than throwing things around and getting physical. Otherwise, autism people are SCARED of LOUD NOISES, which would pretty much rule them out in terms of getting near a gun with a 10 foot pole. So why would this guy have no problems but shoot a gun with many rounds of ammunition? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 16, 2012, 07:57:53 pm Did paranoid, gun-crazed mother trigger son's school killing spree? Friends say she believed world was on edge of collapse >:(
9/16/12 Nancy Lanza portrayed as 'survivalist' who stockpiled food, water and guns She was shot four times in the head, possibly as she slept, by her son Collection of guns included handguns, assault rifle and two hunting rifles Son Adam was reclusive, spending most of his time in adjoining bedrooms Fiercely protective mother insisted he was never left on his own Fellow school pupils described him as very bright, a genius, but painfully shy Moved to Sandy Hook in around 1998 but Mrs Lanza and husband divorced Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2249185/Connecticut-school-shooting-Did-paranoid-gun-crazed-mother-trigger-Adam-Lanzas-school-killing-spree-Friends-say-believed-world-edge-collapse.html#ixzz2FGoHgUcn Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 16, 2012, 10:48:31 pm http://www.tmz.com/2012/12/16/ct-shooter-adam-lanza-mother-gun-obsession-gun-range/ (http://www.tmz.com/2012/12/16/ct-shooter-adam-lanza-mother-gun-obsession-gun-range/)
CT SHOOTER ADAM LANZA Learned How to Fire Guns... From His Mom >:( (http://ll-media.tmz.com/2012/12/16/1216-adam-lanza-mom-abc-2.jpg) Mass murderer Adam Lanza learned everything he knew about firearms ... from his mother. Adam's mom, Nancy Lanza -- who was Adam's first victim -- was an avid gun collector who reportedly bragged to friends and neighbors about her weapons and took her son to several firing ranges to teach him how to shoot ... in the months leading up to his deadly assault. One of Nancy's neighbors, Dan Holmes, told the NY Post ... Nancy was a gun enthusiast ... an avid collector ... often taking her kids to the gun range, infusing them with her obsession with firearms. Adam used several different guns when he opened fire on Sandy Hook Elementary school earlier this week ... all of which were registered to his mother. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 16, 2012, 10:53:43 pm http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/nancy_lanza_was_a_prepper/ (http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/nancy_lanza_was_a_prepper/)
Nancy Lanza was a “prepper” Adam Lanza's mother reportedly belonged to a survivalist movement and feared she was "losing" her son The Telegraph reports that Nancy Lanza was a “prepper” a part of the survivalist movement that we’re sure to hear more about in coming days. According to the paper: Nancy Lanza, whose gun collection was raided by her son Adam for Friday’s massacre at Sandy Hook school, was part of the “prepper” movement, which urges readiness for social chaos by hoarding supplies and training with weapons. “She prepared for the worst,” her sister-in-law Marsha Lanza told reporters. “Last time we visited her in person, we talked about prepping – are you ready for what could happen down the line, when the economy collapses?” It also emerged that Mrs Lanza had spoken of her fears less than a week before the attack that she was “losing” her son. “She said it was getting worse. She was having trouble reaching him,” said a friend of Mrs Lanza who did not want to be named. Alex Halperin is news editor at Salon. You can follow him on Twitter @alexhalperin. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 04:02:53 am Society Is Crumbling Right In Front Of Our Eyes And Banning Guns Won't Help
What in the world is happening to America? I have written many articles about how society is crumbling right in front of our eyes, but now it is getting to the point where people are going to be afraid to go to school or go shopping at the mall. Just consider what has happened over the past week. Adam Lanza savagely murdered 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. 42-year-old Marcus Gurrola threatened to shoot innocent shoppers and fired off more than 50 rounds in the parking lot of Fashion Island Mall in Newport Beach, California. After police apprehended him, he told them that he "was unhappy with life". Earlier in the week, a crazy man wearing a hockey mask and armed with a semi-automatic rifle opened fire on the second floor of a mall in Happy Valley, Oregon. He killed two people and injured a third. On Saturday morning, a lone gunman walked into a hospital in Alabama and opened fire. He killed one police officer and two hospital employees before being gunned down by another police officer. So have we now reached the point where every school, every mall and every hospital is going to need armed security? How will society function efficiently if everyone is constantly worried about mass murderers? In response to the horrible tragedy in Connecticut, many in the mainstream media are suggesting that much stricter gun laws are the obvious solution. After all, if we get rid of all the guns these crazy people won't be able to commit these kinds of crimes, right? Unfortunately, that is not how it works. The criminals don't obey gun control laws. Banning guns will just take them out of the hands of law-abiding American citizens that just want to protect their own families. Adam Lanza didn't let the strict gun control laws up in Connecticut stop him from what he wanted to do. Connecticut already has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, and Adam Lanza broke at least three of them. However, if there had been some armed security officers or some armed teachers at that school, they may have had a chance to protect those dear little children from being brutally gunned down. If gun control was really the solution to our problems, then cities that have implemented strict gun control laws should be some of the safest in the entire country. But sadly, just the opposite is true. For example, Chicago has very strict gun laws. But 10 people were shot in the city of Chicago on Friday alone. Chicago is now considered to be "the deadliest global city", and the murder rate in Chicago is about 25 percent higher than it was last year. So has gun control turned Chicago into a utopia? Of course not. And it won't solve our problems on a national level either. You can find more statistics about the futility of gun control right here. Well, how would things be if we did just the opposite and everyone had a gun? Would gun crime go through the roof? That is what liberals were warning of when the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring every home to have a gun. But instead of disaster, the results turned out to be very impressive... In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender. The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law. Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189. When criminals know that everyone has guns, they are much less likely to try something. And often armed citizens are able to prevent potential mass murderers from doing more damage. You can find several examples of this right here. But of course most of our politicians are not interested in common sense. Instead, they are obsessed with the idea that gun control will make our country "safe" again. Senator Diane Feinstein says that she is ready to introduce a strict gun control bill in January that will "ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession" of many types of firearms. Will such a law keep the criminals from getting guns? No way. Just look at what is happening with the cartels down in Mexico. The criminals are always able to get guns. If our "leaders" were really interested in stopping these mass murders, they would take a look at the role that mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs play in these incidents. If you look at the mass murders that have occurred over the past several decades, in the vast majority of them the murderer had been using mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs... The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) has raised concerns about severe acts of violence as side effects of anti-psychotic and antidepressant drugs not only on individuals but on society as well. Just a month ago PRWeb described drug induced violence as "medicine's best kept secret." And the Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHRI) is calling for a federal investigation on its web page which links no less than 14 mass killings to the use of psychiatric drugs such as Prozac and Paxil. And guess what? According to the Washington Post, one neighbor says that Adam Lanza was "on medication". But will our politicians ever consider a law against such drugs? Of course not. The big corporations that produce those drugs give mountains of money to the campaign funds of our politicians. So the focus of the debate will remain on guns. And a lot of liberals would have us believe that our society could be transformed into some type of "utopia" if we could just get rid of all the guns. Unfortunately, that is simply not true. Our society is in an advanced state of moral decay, and this moral decay is manifesting in our society in thousands of different ways. The corruption runs from the highest levels of society all the way down to the lowest. For those that believe that gun control would somehow "fix America", I have some questions for you... Down in Texas, one set of parents kept their 10-year-old son locked in a bedroom and only fed him bread and water for months. Eventually he died of starvation and they dumped his body in a creek. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? A pastor in north Texas was recently assaulted by an enraged man who beat him to death with an electric guitar. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? Police up in New Jersey say that a man kept his girlfriend padlocked in a bedroom for most of the last 10 years. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? A 31-year-old man up in Canada was found guilty of raping an 8-year-old girl, breaking 16 of her bones and smashing her in the face with a hammer. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? According to the FBI, a New York City police officer is being accused of “planning the kidnap, ****, torture and cannibilization of a number of women”. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? A Secret Service officer that had been assigned to protect Joe Biden’s residence has been charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? Over in Texas, a very sick 29-year-old man stabbed his girlfriend to death and then burned his one-year-old baby alive because she had gone to court and filed for child support. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? Over in Utah, a 21-year-old man is accused of stabbing his grandmother 111 times and then removing her organs with a knife. Would banning guns have kept that from happening? There are more than 3 million reports of child abuse in the United States every single year. Would banning guns keep that from happening? An average of five children die as a result of child abuse in the United States every single day. Would banning guns keep that from happening? The United States has the highest child abuse death rate on the entire globe. Would banning guns keep that from happening? It is estimated that 500,000 Americans that will be born this year will be sexually abused before they turn 18. Would banning guns keep that from happening? In the United States today, it is estimated that one out of every four girls is sexually abused before they become adults. Would banning guns keep that from happening? If there was a way to take all of the guns away from all of the criminals, I would be all in favor of it. Unfortunately, no government on the planet has been able to do that. Instead, we have seen that criminals thrive whenever gun bans are instituted and the guns are taken away from law-abiding citizens. But the bottom line is that our social decay will not be solved either by more guns or less guns. Our social decay is the result of decades of bad decisions. We have pushed morality out of our schools, out of government and out of almost every aspect of public life. Now we are experiencing the bitter fruit of those decisions. And this is not a problem that our government is going to be able to fix. Violent crime increased by 18 percent in 2011, and this is just the beginning. As our economy gets even worse, the rot and decay that have been eating away the foundations of America are going to become even more evident. The number of Americans living in poverty grows with each passing day, and millions upon millions of people are becoming very desperate. Desperate people do desperate things, and crime, rioting and looting are going to become commonplace in the United States in the years ahead. So you can pretend that the government is going to be able to keep our society from crumbling all you want, but that is not going to help you when a gang of desperate criminals has invaded your home and is attacking your family. We definitely should mourn for the victims in Connecticut. It was a horrible national tragedy. But this is just the beginning. The fabric of our society is coming apart at the seams. The feeling of safety and security that we all used to take for granted has been shattered, and the streets of America are going to steadily become much more dangerous. I hope that you are ready. http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/society-is-crumbling-right-in-front-of-our-eyes-and-banning-guns-wont-help Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 04:04:09 am yes... the War on Preppers. Cant have those people who can survive WITH OUT the aid of the government out running around.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 04:05:35 am More Than 2000 Children Are Murdered In The United States Every Single Day
Mass murderer Adam Lanza is yet another example of how society is collapsing right in front of our eyes. When I was young, I never imagined that someone would come into my school and try to kill me. But now any school that does not have armed security is being incredibly foolish. The mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on Friday was the second worst school shooting in modern American history. All of the children that Adam Lanza savagely murdered were either 6 or 7 years old. It was such a horrific crime that even the mainstream media is using words that they would not normally use such as “evil”, “wicked” and “demonic”. There does not seem to be any penalty that would be too harsh for what Adam Lanza did. In this type of case, the death penalty seems way too kind. Unfortunately, Adam Lanza is dead so he will never have his day in court. Instead, the rest of us are left trying to figure out why this happened and what to do about it. Sadly, there will inevitably be more Adam Lanzas. We live in a blood-soaked society that loves and glorifies violence. And I am not just talking about video games and movies. The horrible truth is that more than 2000 children are murdered in the United States every single day in our abortion clinics, and most of our “leaders” actually approve of this practice. When you add in all other forms of abortion such as “morning after pills”, the number is closer to 3000 children a day. Overall, more than 50 million babies have been killed in America since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. We have pushed God and morality out of our schools and out of public life, and instead we have taught our young people that the slaughter of millions of babies is no big deal. Is it any wonder that they are so screwed up? We have raised up a generation of young people without teaching them moral values, and now we are experiencing the bitter fruit of our foolishness. But instead of focusing on what is really causing all of this, the mainstream media seems absolutely obsessed with the idea that more gun control laws would solve our problems. Oh really? Adam Lanza broke at least three Connecticut gun control laws. Would adding a bunch more really make a difference? Just take a look at the city of Chicago. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the entire nation. The intent was to greatly reduce gun crime in the city. But instead, Chicago is now being called “the deadliest global city“, and the murder rate is running about 25 percent higher than last year. Well, what about in other areas of the world? Down in Australia, gun murders rose by about 19 percent and armed robberies rose by about 69 percent after a gun ban was instituted. Ouch. The UK has some of the strictest gun laws on the planet. So how has that worked out? Well, gun crime in England and Wales rose by 89 percent over the course of a decade… The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent. Banning guns is not going to solve anything. The criminals are always going to be able to get guns. But banning guns will take them away from hard working American citizens that just want to have a chance to defend themselves as our society crumbles all around us. Are you ready for some more statistics? The following is from an article by my friend J. Vanne in which he detailed how guns have helped to reduce crime in many areas of the United States… As a matter of fact, Gun Owners of America, cites statistics indicating guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense, or around 80 times a day (other statistics estimate this number could range as low as 1.5 million, but either number is a lot!). This includes 200,000 women a year using guns to defend themselves against sexual abuse. As a matter of fact, as of 2008, armed citizens killed more violent bad guys than the police (1,527 vs. 606). It appears George Washington had it right, when he said “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good.” What about concealed carry? Statistics from the recent past show states that passed concealed carry reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5% and robbery by 3%. Florida, which passed concealed carry in 1987, saw its higher than average homicide rate drop 52% during the following 15 years after passage, to below the national average. But if you listen to the mainstream media, the only solution to this crisis is more gun control laws. As if psychos that somehow are not able to obtain a gun cannot find other ways to attack people. For example, just the other day a very sick Chinese man with a knife attacked 22 children at a school in China. So should we ban all knives too? One thing that the mainstream media is not talking about is the role that pharmaceutical drugs have played in almost every single mass murder in the United States in recent years. The following is from a recent Natural News article… In mass shootings involving guns and mind-altering medications, politicians immediately seek to blame guns but never the medication. Nearly every mass shooting that has taken place in America over the last two decades has a link to psychiatric medication, and it appears today’s tragic event is headed in the same direction. According to ABC News, Adam Lanza, the alleged shooter, has been labeled as having “mental illness” and a “personality disorder.” These are precisely the words typically heard in a person who is being “treated” with mind-altering psychiatric drugs. One of the most common side effects of psychiatric drugs is violent outbursts and thoughts of suicide. And guess what? According to the Washington Post, one neighbor is telling the press that Adam Lanza was “on medication”. Is anyone surprised? But of course the mainstream media will never call for a ban on mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs. The companies that produce those drugs spend billions of dollars to advertise on their networks. And as horrific as this crisis was, let us not be blind to what is happening all around us every day. Adam Lanza murdered 20 children in cold blood and that was a crime for which there are not words strong enough to denounce it. However, more than 100 times as many children are killed in the abortion clinics of America every single day, and most of our politicians stand up and publicly defend the slaughter of those innocents. We have covered America with the blood of our own children, and yet hardly anyone speaks up about this anymore. In a previous article about abortion, I listed 19 facts about the mass murder that is happening in abortion clinics all across the United States… #1 There have been more than 53 million abortions performed in the United States since Roe v. Wade was decided back in 1973. #2 When you total up all forms of abortion, including those caused by the abortion drug RU 486, the grand total comes to more than a million abortions performed in the United States every single year. #3 The number of American babies killed by abortion each year is roughly equal to the number of U.S. military deaths that have occurred in all of the wars that the United States has ever been involved in combined. #4 Approximately 3,000 Americans lost their lives as a result of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. Every single day, more than 3,000 American babies are killed by abortion. #5 It has been reported that a staggering 41 percent of all New York City pregnancies end in abortion. #6 According to Pastor Clenard Childress, approximately 52 percent of all African-American pregnancies now end in abortion. #7 One very shocking study found that 86 percent of all abortions are done for the sake of convenience. #8 According to the Guttmacher Institute, the average cost of a first trimester abortion at the ten week mark is $451. #9 The average cost of a vaginal birth with no complications in the United States is now over $9,000. #10 A Department of Homeland Security report that was released in January 2012 says that if you are “anti-abortion”, you are a potential terrorist. Unfortunately, there have also been other government reports that have also identified “anti-abortion” protesters as potential threats. #11 A while back one Philadelphia abortionist was charged with killing seven babies that were born alive, but witnesses claim that he actually slaughtered hundreds “of living, breathing newborn children by severing their spinal cords or slitting their necks.” #12 Some abortion clinics have been caught selling aborted baby parts to medical researchers. #13 Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger once said the following…. “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” #14 In a 1922 book entitled “Woman, Morality, and Birth Control”, Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger wrote the following…. “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.” #15 Planned Parenthood performs more than 300,000 abortions every single year. #16 Planned Parenthood specifically targets the poor. A staggering 72 percent of Planned Parenthood’s “customers” have incomes that are either equal to or beneath 150 percent of the federal poverty level. #17 There are 30 Planned Parenthood executives that make more than $200,000 a year. A few of them make more than $300,000 a year. #18 Planned Parenthood received more than 487 million dollars from the federal government during 2010. #19 The following is one description of the five steps of a partial birth abortion…. 1) Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby’s legs with forceps. 2) The baby’s leg is pulled out into the birth canal. 3) The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head. 4) The abortionist jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull. 5) The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed. So yes, we should deeply mourn for the 20 dear children that were ruthlessly gunned down in Connecticut. But let us also deeply mourn for the more than 50,000,000 children that have been purposely slaughtered in this country since 1973. There is no way that America will survive if we continue to murder our own children like this. http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/more-than-2000-children-are-murdered-in-the-united-states-every-single-day Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 04:10:00 am Sunday, December 16, 2012 at 7:47PM
Today's Show: THE CONNECTICUT TRAGEDY Chris discusses the terrible shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut and the impact, socially and politically in the wake of this horrible crime. Are left wing pundits and politicians using the event to attack the Second Amendment? Would more gun control have prevented the killings? A similar tragedy happened in England in 1996, and as a result, the UK put a ban on hand guns -- what has been the result? Have firearms crimes diminished? Or gone through the roof? http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_CONNECTICUT.TRAGEDY_12.17.12.mp3 http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=4700 End Time Current Events: 12-16-12 Table of Contents: » Newtown Conn. school shooting story already being changed by the media to eliminate eyewitness reports of a second shooter » To stop school shootings we should let the criminals have all the guns; argue gun control advocates » ABC, NY Times reporters go full-on vulture tweeting the friends and family of the Connecticut massacre targets » Gun control? We need medication control! Newton elementary school shooter Adam Lanza likely on meds; labeled as having ‘personality disorder’ » Lanza most likely had a form of Autism: Let’s look at the facts regarding Autism as Autism was virtually unknown before the modern day advent of vaccinations » See Scott Johnson’s Teaching: Pharmakeia: Sorcery, Pharmaceuticals & the Roots of Modern Day Drug Industry » Gun control petition to White House gets large and immediate support online » The Documented Human “Death Toll” Cost of “Gun Control” » Crime & Murder Rates Plummet After a Law Required Firearms for Residents in Kennesaw, GA » Dr. Johnson’s recommendations for natural alternatives to mind altering meds » Warning Gun Control Advocates are at a Fever Pitch to Ban Firearms Audio: http://www.contendingfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/342-12-16-12-DS300002-C.mp3 PDF: http://www.contendingfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/End-Time-Current-Events-12-16-12.pdf Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 17, 2012, 08:21:58 am Sunday, December 16, 2012 at 7:47PM Today's Show: THE CONNECTICUT TRAGEDY Chris discusses the terrible shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut and the impact, socially and politically in the wake of this horrible crime. Are left wing pundits and politicians using the event to attack the Second Amendment? Would more gun control have prevented the killings? A similar tragedy happened in England in 1996, and as a result, the UK put a ban on hand guns -- what has been the result? Have firearms crimes diminished? Or gone through the roof? http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_CONNECTICUT.TRAGEDY_12.17.12.mp3 Yeah - my local paper(Dallas Morning News) almost always has Dallas Cowboys coverage(during the NFL season, that is) on the front page every Monday morning(win or lose). Nope, not today, but instead just a mere ticker headline at the very top of the page(despite their thrilling overtime win over the Steelers). Instead, the Connecticut shooting made front page again today, where one of the headlines was pushing gun control(and the DMN leans "conservative", FWIW). Yeah, the NWO minions are pulling every stop to push gun control now, especially after Obama's "re-election". Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 17, 2012, 08:23:18 am http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr2SHssCaWM
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 17, 2012, 10:36:38 am Connecticut school district in lockdown following report of suspicious person in area
12/17/12 DEVELOPING: Schools in Ridgefield, Conn., are on lockdown following reports of a "suspicious person" possibly armed with a rifle. Ridgefield is approximately 19 miles from Newtown, where 20 children and six adults were killed Friday when a gunman opened fire at Sandy Hook elementary school. Ridgefield Superintendent Deborah Low released a statement Monday saying that schools in the district "have been put into lockdown." "Due to a report of a possibly suspicious person in the Branchville Train Station area, all schools have been put into lockdown. Branchville Elementary school buses have been diverted to East Ridge Middle School and BES students are in the auditorium," Low said. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/17/connecticut-school-district-in-lockdown-following-report-suspicious-person-in/#ixzz2FK3zq59H Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 10:58:03 am MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Talks Gun ‘Confiscation’
Quote Liberals always say they don’t want to take away guns. But give them an awful tragedy like the Newtown, Conn. shooting and they get bolder and more honest. MSNBC host Ed Schultz showed a rare bout of such honesty during a brief Twitter exchange Saturday. Schultz asked “Why should anyone own an assault rifle ?” and followed it up by saying “it's the confiscation of these types of weapons that counts and will have an impact.” “The Ed Show” host wasn’t done his attack on gun rights. “The NRA needs to state the case why assault weapons are needed by anyone,” he claimed. And after that, he told one poster that “a Glock pistol qualifies as an assault weapon.” That last bit is surely a surprise to both gun owners and Congress which didn’t include handguns in its previous assault weapons ban. Ultimately, Schultz talked of changing the Constitution to one person on Twitter. “We are the Constitution and we as a people can change whatever we want. Get ready Dude !” he wrote. Schultz has a murky history with guns. In early December, he said the NFL should tell players not to have guns: “I don't think it's out of the realm that the NFL should be asking players or demanding or making su-, don't own firearms. Just, don't, all that is is trouble. All that is is trouble.” However, he seemed unmoved when his producer James “Holmy” Holm talked about putting a gun to CEOs to force them to spend back in 2011. “The president is going to speak with business leaders that are sitting on $1.9 trillion dollars -- $1.9 trillion dollars. Maybe what we should do is put a gun to their head and just say, give us that $1.9 trillion dollars, you don't need to read anything, just hand it to us!” he told listeners to Schultz’s radio program. Here is the whole recent exchange on Twitter. Ed Schultz @WeGotEd @gt500cws who's facts ? I have a fact for you. We are the Constitution and we as a people can change whatever we want. Get ready Dude ! Ed Schultz @WeGotEd @gt500cws a Glock pistol qualifies as an assault weapon. Ed Schultz @WeGotEd The NRA needs to state the case why assault weapons are needed by anyone. Ed Schultz @WeGotEd @gt500cws a Glock pistol qualifies as an assault weapon. Ed Schultz @WeGotEd Write all the feel good laws you want, it's the confiscation of these types of weapons that counts and will have an impact. Ed Schultz @WeGotEd Why should anyone own an assault rifle ? We need to be realistic about the 2nd amendment..society has changed, views have changed. Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2012/12/16/msnbc-s-ed-schultz-talks-gun-confiscation#ixzz2FKTZBKmw Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 17, 2012, 10:59:53 am CNN's Lemon Goes on Anti-Gun Tirade, Calls for Assault Weapons Ban
CNN anchor Don Lemon went on an anti-gun rant on Monday morning and called for an assault weapons ban. Lemon is only the latest CNN anchor to abandon journalistic standards and push for gun control. "We need to get guns and bullets and automatic weapons off the streets. They should only be available to police officers and to hunt al-Qaeda and the Taliban and not hunt elementary school children," an emotional Lemon appealed. [Video below the break. Audio here.] Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2012/12/17/cnns-lemon-goes-anti-gun-tirade-calls-assault-weapons-ban#ixzz2FKU8thg3 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 17, 2012, 11:52:12 am http://www.infowars.com/americans-turn-in-guns-after-school-massacre/
Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com December 17, 2012 Law-abiding Americans across the country are turning in their guns as part of police buyback programs in response to the school massacre in Connecticut – a shocking illustration of how citizens are choosing to disarm themselves without the need for gun control legislation. Citizens in Brooklyn, San Francisco, Oakland, Evanston, Ill, and Baltimore all lined up around the block to sell their guns back to police as a gesture in response to the Sandy Hook shooting on Friday. Mt. Ollie Baptist Church in Brownsville and St. Peters Lutheran Church in Cypress Hills, Brooklyn opened their doors for people to anonymously turn in their guns on Saturday, with the program netting 134 weapons, most of which were revolvers and pistols. In another buyback event at Prince George’s County, 150 guns were handed in for cash, while a further 160 were exchanged for gift cards at St. Mark’s United Methodist Church in Laurel, MD. more Title: NRA Goes Silent After Connecticut School Shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 09:41:37 am http://news.yahoo.com/nra-goes-silent-connecticut-school-shooting-080658189.html
12/18/12 Where is the NRA? The nation's largest gun-rights organization — typically outspoken about its positions even after shooting deaths — has gone all but silent since last week's rampage at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school that left 26 people dead, including 20 children. Its Facebook page has disappeared. It has posted no tweets. It makes no mention of the shooting on its website. None of its leaders hit the media circuit Sunday to promote its support of the Second Amendment right to bear arms as the nation mourns the latest shooting victims and opens a new debate over gun restrictions. On Monday, the NRA offered no rebuttal as 300 anti-gun protesters marched to its Capitol Hill office. After previous mass shootings — such as in Oregon and Wisconsin — the group was quick to both send its condolences and defend gun owners' constitutional rights, popular among millions of Americans. There's no indication that the National Rifle Association's silence this time is a signal that a change in its ardent opposition to gun restrictions is imminent. Nor has there been any explanation for its absence from the debate thus far. The NRA, which claims 4.3 million members and is based in Northern Virginia, did not return telephone messages Monday seeking comment. Its deep-pocketed efforts to oppose gun control laws have proven resilient. Firearms are in a third or more of U.S. households and suspicion runs deep of an overbearing government whenever it proposes expanding federal authority. The argument of gun-rights advocates that firearm ownership is a bedrock freedom as well as a necessary option for self-defense has proved persuasive enough to dampen political enthusiasm for substantial change. Seldom has the NRA gone so long after a fatal shooting without a public presence. It resumed tweeting just one day after a gunman killed two people and then himself at an Oregon shopping mall last Tuesday, and one day after six people were fatally shot at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin in August. The Connecticut shootings occurred three days after the incident in Oregon. "The NRA's probably doing a good thing by laying low," said Hogan Gidley, a Republican strategist and gun owner who was a top aide to Rick Santorum's presidential bid. "Often after these tragedies, so many look to lay blame on someone, and the NRA is an easy whipping boy for this." Indeed, since the Connecticut shootings, the NRA has been taunted and criticized at length, vitriol that may have prompted the shuttering of its Facebook page just a day after the association boasted about reaching 1.7 million supporters on the social media network. Twitter users have been relentless, protesting the organization with hashtags like NoWayNRA. The NRA has not responded to them. Its last tweets, sent Friday, offered a chance to win an auto flashlight. Offline, some 300 protesters gathered outside the NRA's lobbying headquarters on Capitol Hill on Monday chanting, "Shame on the NRA" and waving signs declaring "Kill the 2nd Amendment, Not Children" and "Protect Children, Not Guns." "I had to be here," said Gayle Fleming, 65, a real estate agent from Arlington, Va., saying she was attending her first anti-gun rally. "These were 20 babies. I will be at every rally, will sign every letter, call every congressman going forward." Retired attorney Kathleen Buffon of Chevy Chase, Md., reflected on earlier mass shootings, saying: "All of the other ones, they've been terrible. This is the last straw. These were children." "The NRA has had a stranglehold on Congress," she added as she marched toward the NRA's unmarked office. "It's time to call them out." The group's reach on Capitol Hill is wide as it wields its deep pockets to defeat lawmakers, many of them Democrats, who push for restrictions on gun ownership. The NRA outspent its chief opponent by a 73-1 margin to lobby the outgoing Congress, according to the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation, which tracks such spending. It spent more than 4,000 times its biggest opponents during the 2012 election. In all, the group spent at least $24 million this election cycle — $16.8 million through its political action committee and nearly $7.5 million through its affiliated Institute for Legislative Action. Its chief foil, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, spent just $5,816. On direct lobbying, the NRA also was mismatched. Through July 1, the NRA spent $4.4 million to lobby Congress to the Brady Campaign's $60,000. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 03:33:08 pm Honestly, don't know what to make of this. No, not saying this whole thing was staged like a Broadway Show, but nonetheless this news clip looks very bizarre... :-\
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urrRcgB581w Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 18, 2012, 03:44:41 pm Not much there really. Could be this, could be that.
I do know that many people tend to smile when they are nervous, but the smile is no indication that they find anything humorous. His apparent preparation to speak too could be just nerves. I'd like to see how many cameras were in his face when he spoke. One might make a case that it looked like he was "getting into character". I don't see enough from the clip to go that far. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 05:15:13 pm Apparently, the name Sandy has a meaning(this web site posted isn't the only web site source saying this)...
http://www.babynology.com/meaning-sandy-f1.html Pet form, originally Scottish, of the Greek name Alexander. Meaning is "defender of mankind". Sandy Hook(elementary), Hurricane Sandy, Sandy Island, Sandy Oregon... ??? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 06:56:25 pm http://news.yahoo.com/congressional-backing-grows-gun-control-debate-220341844--politics.html
Congressional backing grows for gun control debate WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional gun rights supporters showed an increased willingness Tuesday to consider new legislation to control firearms in the aftermath of the Connecticut school shootings — provided it also addresses mental health issues and the impact of violent video games. A former co-chairman of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., and 10-term House Republican Jack Kingston — a Georgia lawmaker elected with strong National Rifle Association backing — were the latest to join the call to consider gun control as part of a comprehensive, anti-violence effort next year. "Put guns on the table, also put video games on the table, put mental health on the table," Kingston said. But he added that nothing should be done immediately, saying, "There is a time for mourning and a time to sort it out. I look forward to sorting it out and getting past the grief stage." With the nation's nerves still raw over the murders of 20 elementary school children and six teachers, White House, spokesman Jay Carney said President Barack Obama was "actively supportive" of a plan by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to introduce legislation to reinstate an assault weapons ban. While Obama has long supported a ban, he exerted little effort to get it passed during his first term. Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association, silent since the shootings, said in a statement that it "is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again." There was no indication what that might entail. The group, the best-known defender of gun rights in America, scheduled a news conference for Friday. On Capitol Hill, Feinstein is likely to become chairman next year of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which may get the first crack at considering firearms legislation. Carney said the president also would support legislation that closes a gun show "loophole," which allows people to buy guns from private dealers without a background check. And he says Obama would be "interested in looking at" legislation to restrict high capacity ammunition clips. The spokesman said Obama was heartened by growing support on Capitol Hill for a national discussion on gun violence, particularly from seemingly unlikely lawmakers. The president spoke on the phone Tuesday with West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat and avid hunter, who said after the Connecticut shootings that "everything should be on the table" in those discussions. Carney sidestepped questions about whether Obama regrets not having taken stronger gun control during his first term, but he said the president does think more needs to be done. "We as a nation — and he, as a member and leader of the nation — need to do more," he said. Late Wednesday, the National Rifle Association, the most potent pro-gun group and one that keeps score of lawmakers' votes, explained its silence until now. "The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters - and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the NRA statement said. "Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting." Among members of Congress, Thompson, the former Sportsmen's Caucus co-chairman, was named to lead a Democratic task force on gun violence. He's a hunter, a wounded Vietnam veteran and a conservative Democrat. "The only experience I've had with assault weapons was the one that I was trained with when I was in the Army," he said. "I know that this is not a war on guns. Gun owners and hunters across this country have every right to own legitimate guns for legitimate purposes and ... we are not going to take law-abiding citizens 'guns away from them." On Monday, NRA member Manchin, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa — senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee — said it's time for a debate that would include gun control. Reid previously had taken pro-gun positions for years. Not all Republicans were willing to go as far as Grassley or Kingston, but they didn't rule out tackling gun control. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell told reporters, "The entire Congress is united in condemning the violence in Newtown and on the need to enforce our laws. As we continue to learn the facts, Congress will examine whether there is an appropriate and constitutional response that would better protect our citizens." McConnell added that Reid controls the Senate schedule. At a regular House Republican closed-door meeting Tuesday Rep. Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, a psychologist, led a discussion on mental illness — which he described as the primary cause of mass shootings. Murphy said he told colleagues that mental illness was the common link in similar tragic incidents and "we have to stop pretending it doesn't exist. We need to understand what it is that triggers changes in someone." "I see it as the center of the issue. Get mental illness out of the shadows." ___ Associated Press writer Julie Pace contributed. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 07:45:58 pm I wonder if something like this have angered gun control advocates too? ::)
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/mark-sanchez-most-recent-football-player-receive-death-222219536--nfl.html Mark Sanchez is the most recent football player to receive death threats via Twitter It takes a "special" kind of repugnant punk to throw death threats at athletes via social media, and when such things happen as we all still have recent events heavy on our hearts, it's particularly disgusting. Yet, it seems as if there are "human beings" so infantile and stupid that it will actually occur to them that threatening the lives of athletes based on their negative exploits on the field is a really neat idea. So it was for someone who has the Twitter handle @BraveGrancru, whose account is still somehow up as we publish this post. (Twitter, you might want to look into that). As New York Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez was turning the ball over five times in the Jets' 14-10 loss to the Tennessee Titans on Monday Night Football, the aforementioned moron was tweeting stuff like this: DON'T COME TO PRACTICE WEDNESDAY I PROMISE YOU BULLETS EVERYWHERE .. @mark_sanchez SANCHEZ BETTER HAVE ARMED SECURITY AT PRACTICE !! YOU THINK IMMA SIT HERE AND WATCH THIS BULL**** ?? TUHHH @nyjets I SWARE IF I EVER SEE YOU SON U DEAD IDC YOU ARE THE WORST QB IN THE NFL YOU MEXICAN ***** PLEASE GIVE ME SOME TIME ON AIR TO VOICE MY FUTURE KILLING !! I HATE MARK SANCHEZ AND HE MUST GO ! @foxnews "Kill yo self tonight ! Or imma do it for you Wednesday at practice @Mark_Sanchez." This person then published a picture of himself on his account, with the note: TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT YOUR KILLA WEDNESDAY NIGHT NIGHT Given this individual's clear hunger for publicity, we'll skip the step of publishing his picture. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said that NFL security has followed up with the Jets organization regarding this matter. Sadly, this jerk will get his 15 minutes, According to his Twitter timeline that shouldn't even be up anymore, he's received inquiries from several members of the New York football media. We can only hope that he's making this up. Sanchez isn't the first NFL player to get death threats on Twitter. San Francisco 49ers receiver Kyle Williams received several after he fumbled twio returns in the most recent NFC championship game, and Washington Redskins receiver Josh Morgan was the recipient of similar threats when a penalty called on Morgan was a key factor in Washington's 31-28 September loss to the St. Louis Rams. We'll avoid the soapbox here, except to say that if you actually think this is a reasonable or right idea, there's obviously something very, very wrong with you. and we've seen what happens when such alarms go unnoticed. The NFL needs to step up, work with the appropriate authorities, and make a serious commitment to doing something proactive about this. . Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 08:07:01 pm The Antipsychotic Prescribed To Adam Lanza Has A Troubled History All Its Own
Geoffrey Ingersoll|Dec. 18, 2012, 2:36 PM http://www.businessinsider.com/adam-lanza-taking-antipsychotic-fanapt-2012-12 By now the whole country is fully embroiled in the Gun Control debate, spurred by the grisly murder of 27 people, mostly kids, at the Sandy Hook Elementary school last Friday. Guns might not be the only problem though. New York Magazine wrote a piece about shooter Adam Lanza's supposed "aspergers" syndrome as a "red herring" meant to distract from the real problem (guns, of course, the subject goes without mentioning). Inside the piece though they report Adam Lanza's uncle said the boy was prescribed Fanapt, a controversial anti-psychotic medicine. Fanapt was the subject of a Bloomberg report when it passed regulators, after previously getting the "nonapproval" stamp. Why wasn't it approved, you might ask? There are many reasons, some of which have to do with competing entities in a competitive market. The main cited reason for the rejection was that it caused severe heart problems in enough patients to cause a stir. Maybe more importantly, though, Fanapt is one of a many drugs the FDA pumped out with an ability to exact the opposite desired effect on people: that is, you know, inducing rather than inhibiting psychosis and aggressive behavior. In fact, Fanapt was dropped by its first producer, picked up by another, initially rejected by the FDA, then later picked up and mass produced. The adverse side-effect is said to be "infrequent," but still it exists, and can't be ignored. The reaction invoked by the drug in some people is reminiscent of the Jeffrey R. MacDonald case, where a Green Beret slaughtered his entire family and then fabricated a story about a marauding troop of "hopped up hippies". MacDonald though, had Eskatrol in his system, a weight-loss amphetamine that's since been banned in part for its side effects of psychotic behavior and aggression. These drugs are not the only ones that can cause the opposite of their desired effect. Several anti-depressant medications are also restricted to adults, for the depression they inspire in kids rather than eliminate. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 08:26:53 pm http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/****s-stores-suspend-sales-rifles-18005190#.UNDVBWcoFkw
Replace the asterisks with the name of the story below... D!ck's Stores Suspend Sales of Certain Rifles 12/18/12 A sporting goods chain says it's suspending sales of modern rifles nationwide because of the school shooting in Connecticut. D!ck's Sporting Goods also says it's removing all guns from display at its store closest to Newtown, where the massacre took place. Authorities say a gunman killed 26 people, mostly children, with a military-style rifle at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday after killing his mother. He then killed himself. A statement posted on ****'s website expresses sympathy for the victims' families. It says sales of modern sporting rifles will be suspended during "this time of national mourning." ****'s declined to answer Associated Press questions about how long the suspension would last or which weapons were being pulled. Pittsburgh-based ****'s Sporting Goods Inc. has more than 500 stores in 44 states. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 09:00:02 pm http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-walmart-dicks-cabelas-bushmaster-20121218,0,7553838.story
Again, replace the asterisks with the name of the story mentioned below... D!ck's, Cabela's, others reconsider sales of Sandy Hook gun Several major firearms retailers are rethinking sales strategies for the rifle said to be used in Friday’s massacre in Connecticut. Cabela’s, an outdoor products retailer, was still offering Bushmaster AR-15 rifles for between $730 and $1,040 each on its website. But the sale page notes that the firearm is not available for sale at the company’s Connecticut store. Dick’s Sporting Goods said in a statement that it removed all guns from its store near Newtown “out of respect for the victims and their families” and suspended sales of modern sporting rifles in all its stores nationwide. Last month, when revealing earnings for Dick’s third quarter, Chief Executive Edward Stack said that gun sales “have spiked since the election.” “We expect that the gun and ammunition business will move to be a slightly bigger part of our business going forward and that will help the earnings,” he said in a conference call with analysts. Wal-Mart, which sells guns from the Bushmaster line at about 1,700 stores nationwide, pulled the information page for the brand's Patrolman's Carbine M4A3 rifle from its website Monday, according to the Nation publication. In a statement, the company said it remains "dedicated to the safe and responsible sale of firearms in areas of the country where they are sold." "We did have an information page on Walmart.com regarding this model of gun that was taken down in light of the tragic events, but this product was never available for purchase on the website," said spokesman Kory Lundberg. Gun sales seemed to be rising before the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. More women were picking up firearms, manufacturers were unveiling new innovations and Wall Street had embraced weapons makers’ stocks. But on Tuesday, the share prices for public firearms producers such as Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger continued to dive. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 09:20:21 pm Honestly, don't know what to make of this. No, not saying this whole thing was staged like a Broadway Show, but nonetheless this news clip looks very bizarre... :-\ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urrRcgB581w Peter Lanza, Adam Lanza's Father, Was Cut Off From Son Before Sandy Hook Shooting: Report Updated: 12/18/2012 6:04 pm EST HuffPo w/ vid Peter Lanza -- Adam Lanza's father -- reportedly had almost no involvement in his son's life in the years leading up to the Sandy Hook shooting. NBC News reports that Adam had cut off communications with Peter, refusing to see him, according to a source close to the family. Peter and Nancy Lanza split in 2001 and in 2010, Peter started dating a new woman. The source said that's when Adam stopped speaking with his dad. The father and son hadn't seen each other since then, according to the report. On the day of the Sandy Hook massacre, Nancy Lanza was her son's first victim. In the years leading up to that incident, Nancy pulled her son out of high school because of a disagreement with the Newtown Public School District, Nancy's sister-in-law tells ABC News. "She wound up home-schooling him because she battled with the school district," Marsha Lanza said. It's unclear what Nancy Lanza and the school district butted heads over. Paula Levy, a divorce mediator who worked with the Lanza, said they both worried about caring for their son. "The only two things I remember them saying is that she really didn't like to leave him alone, and I know they went out of their way to accommodate him," Levy said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 09:46:33 pm http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-shooters-computer-badly-damaged-151437335--abc-news-topstories.html
12/17/12 Newtown Gunman's Computer Damaged, Evidence Possibly Destroyed A computer at the Connecticut home where Newtown, Conn., school shooter Adam Lanza lived with his mother was badly damaged, perhaps smashed with a hammer, said police who hope the machine might still yield clues to the gunman's motive. The computer's hard drive appeared to have been badly damaged with a hammer or screw driver, law enforcement authorities told ABC News, complicating efforts to exploit it for evidence. Officials have "seized significant evidence at [Lanza's] residence," said Connecticut State Police spokesman Paul Vance, adding that the process of sifting through that much forensic evidence would be a lengthy and "painstaking process." Authorities also told ABC News that the weapons used in Friday's rampage at Sandyhook Elementary School, which left dead 20 children and seven adults including Lanza's mother Nancy, were purchased by his mother between 2010 and 2012. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2012, 10:10:35 pm http://news.yahoo.com/stylists-lanza-never-spoke-made-no-eye-contact-215310243.html
Stylists: Lanza never spoke, made no eye contact NEWTOWN, Conn. (AP) — As a teenager, Adam Lanza would come in for a haircut about every six weeks without speaking or looking at anyone and always accompanied by his mother, said stylists at a salon in the town where Lanza gunned down 27 people last week, including his mother, before killing himself. He stopped coming in a few years ago, and the employees at the salon thought he had moved away, said stylist Bob Skuba. The comments from him and his colleagues were among the first describing how the Lanzas interacted with each other. Investigators have found no letters or diaries that could explain the attack, one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. Cutting Adam Lanza's hair "was a very long half an hour. It was a very uncomfortable situation," stylist Diane Harty said. She said that she never heard his voice and that Nancy Lanza also hardly spoke. Another stylist, Jessica Phillips, echoed their descriptions of the Lanzas and added that Nancy Lanza would give her son directions about what to do and where to go. Adam would move only "when his mother told him to," Skuba said. "I would say, 'Adam, come on.' He wouldn't move," Skuba said. "And his mother would have to say, 'Adam, come on, he's ready.' It was like I was invisible." He said Adam also wouldn't move from his chair after his hair was cut until his mother told him to. If a stylist would ask Adam a question, Skuba said, his mother would answer. "He would just be looking down at the tiles ... the whole time," Skuba said. Former classmates have previously described Adam Lanza as intelligent but remote, and former high school adviser described him as anxious and shy. Several people who knew his mother have described her as a devoted parent. Divorce paperwork released this week showed that Nancy Lanza had the authority to make all decisions regarding Adam's upbringing. The divorce was finalized in September 2009, when Adam Lanza was 17. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 19, 2012, 07:41:17 am Facebook halts accounts for questioning narrative
'Essentially labeling such activity a thought crime' Facebook is suspending user accounts that question the official narrative behind the Sandy Hook school massacre, following a warning by Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance that “misinformation” posted on social media sites could result in prosecution. An image posted in the aftermath of the shootings that questioned whether “a clumsy 20-year-old autistic kid” could have pulled off the murders of 26 people was deleted and the user’s account hit with a three day suspension. “I was informed the reason for this punishment was the result of a meme I had shared,” writes the editor of SecretsOfTheFed.com. “Facebook told me it “…violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities”. I was further warned that “If you continue to abuse Facebook’s features, your account could be permanently disabled.” http://www.infowars.com/facebook-suspends-account-for-questioning-official-narrative-on-shooting/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 19, 2012, 11:04:20 am Do everybody a favor and delete the accounts of every Facebook user!
But this is a new low for police state tactics. Quote following a warning by Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance that “misinformation” posted on social media sites could result in prosecution. This guy is delusional. Cameras are pointed their way, so now they got to work their 15 minutes. Talk about misinformation, then he needs to talk to the media, who hasn't got it right yet what happened. Initially, they slandered Adam's brother saying Ryan was the shooter. They are the main source of all this "misinformation", which is then forwarded across social media and they well know it. It's why they put out the info they do. The media should be prosecuted for lying to the public and sensationalizing stories to promote political views. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 19, 2012, 12:36:17 pm House Dem: 'Turn in your guns'
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee ::) (D-Texas) on Wednesday afternoon urged people to turn in their guns, arguing it would be an appropriate response to last week's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn. "I would personally just say to those who are listening, maybe you want to turn in your guns," Jackson Lee said on the House floor. "Oh no, I'm not going to take your guns. But look at what D1ck's Sporting Goods did … they wanted to be part of the solution and part of America." D1ck's Sporting Goods announced this week that it would stop selling and displaying guns at its store closest to Newtown, and would suspend the sale of modern sporting rifles nation-wide out of respect for the victims of the shooting. "We are extremely saddened by the unspeakable tragedy that occurred last week in Newtown, CT, and our hearts go out to the victims and their families, and to the entire community," the chain said in a statement on its website. "We continue to extend our deepest sympathies to those affected by this terrible tragedy." While Jackson Lee said she would not take guns away from people, she noted that she is the sponsor of legislation, H.R. 227. That bill would raise the eligibility to carry a handgun from 18 to 21, and ban people under 21 from possessing semiautomatic assault weapons. Her bill, the Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act, would also increase penalties for repeat violations of gun possession under the Brady Act, and prohibit the keeping of a loaded firearm in any premises where there is a risk that the firearm could harm a child. She encouraged House members to support her bill, which was introduced in January 2011 and at this point has no cosponsors. "Let us mourn with action," she said. http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/273753-house-dem-calls-on-people-to-turn-in-your-guns Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 19, 2012, 12:38:43 pm Gross. Barack Obama Uses Sandy Hook Massacre to Push Tax Hikes (Video)
This was gross. During his press conference this morning Barack Obama used the masssacre at Sandy Hook School to push Republicans to agree to his tax hikes. “After what we’ve gone through over the past several months, a devastating hurricane and now one of the worse tragedies in our memory, the country deserves the folks to be willing to compromise for the greater good.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J04EnXTS3KE http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/12/gross-barack-obama-uses-sandy-hook-massacre-to-push-tax-hikes-video/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 19, 2012, 02:36:04 pm Father of Sandy Hook Victim Asks ‘Read the Card?’ Seconds Before Tear-jerking Press Conference
http://www.infowars.com/father-of-sandy-hook-victim-asks-read-the-card-seconds-before-tear-jerking-press-conference/ Infowars.com December 19, 2012 As unexplained factors in the tragic Sandy Hook school shooting continue to surface, independent researchers have pointed to an odd clip where Robbie Parker, father of slain 6-year-old Emily Parker, asks if his should read off the card, and is told that he should during a press conference that took place the day after Friday’s shooting. The Huffington Post described Parker’s heartfelt statement as “fighting back tears and struggling to catch his breath,” though he can be seen craking a smile and brief laugh just before approaching the microphone. The full press conference can be viewed here. Is the establishment media trying to steer the victims’ reactions? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=urrRcgB581w Statement from Alex Jones: “My deepest condolences go out to Mr. Parker and the rest of his family, as well as all the other families suffering from this tragedy. It appears that members of the media or government have given him a card and are telling him what to say as they steer reaction to this event, so this needs to be looked into.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 19, 2012, 06:56:59 pm MORE: http://www.secretsofthefed.com/breaking-un-small-arms-treaty-passes-while-media-sleeps/
BREAKING: UN Small Arms Treaty Passes While Media Sleeps Posted by: liberating elderPosted date: December 19, 2012 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 19, 2012, 07:24:32 pm So they're waiting until NOW to hold violent video games accountable?? Yes, they have a big affect on our youth, but again, they pretty much put this issue to sleep after 9/11, but wait until NOW to bring it to the discussion table DESPITE prior school shootings?? And notice Sen John Rockefeller is the one calling them out - yeah, the same guy who's part of the 13 Illuminati family members...
http://news.yahoo.com/videogames-under-fire-hollywood-lays-low-school-shooting-224001440.html Videogames under fire, Hollywood lays low after school shooting LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The multi-billion-dollar videogame industry came under scrutiny on Wednesday after Hollywood canceled, postponed or played down a slew of movies and TV shows with violent content in the wake of last week's shooting at a Connecticut elementary school. In Washington, Senator John Rockefeller called for a national study of the impact of violent videogames on children and a review of the rating system. Although investigators in Newtown, Connecticut, have given no motive for Friday's shooting rampage, some U.S. media have reported that the 20-year-old gunman played popular videogame "Call of Duty" - in which players conduct simulated warfare missions - in the basement of his home. The gunman, Adam Lanza, killed himself at the scene after gunning down 20 young children, six school employees and his mother. Rockefeller said he had long been concerned about the impact of violent games and videos on children. "Major corporations, including the video game industry, make billions on marketing and selling violent content to children. They have a responsibility to protect our children," Rockefeller said in a statement. The Entertainment Software Association, which represents the $78 billion U.S. videogame industry, on Wednesday offered its "heartfelt prayers and condolences" to the Newtown families. But it said in a statement that "the search for meaningful solutions must consider the broad range of actual factors that may have contributed to this tragedy. "Any such study needs to include the years of extensive research that has shown no connection between entertainment and real-life violence," the association said. NEW 'CALL OF DUTY,' 'HALO' GAMES RAKE IN BILLIONS Activision Blizzard's latest title in its "Call of Duty" franchise - "Call of Duty: Black Ops II" - hit $1 billion in sales two weeks after its launch last month. Other popular videogames include Microsoft's "Halo 4," in which players kill evil aliens. The game racked up $220 million in global sales on its launch day in November. Mike Hickey, an analyst at National Alliance Capital Markets, said backlashes against videogames were not rare, but he was unaware of an instance of games being pulled off store shelves in the past. When the Columbine school shooting happened in 1999, there was a similar outcry because the two perpetrators were students who played the shooter game "Doom," Hickey told Reuters. Executives at Hollywood movie studios and TV networks have mostly laid low this week as Americans seek answers to the Newtown slaughter, and discuss how to prevent similar gun violence. However, content seen as sensitive has been pulled from the airwaves, including an episode of the SyFy TV series "Haven" that contained violent scenes in a high school setting, and the premiere next week of a TLC show called "Best Funeral Ever." Discovery Channel canceled a third season of its reality series "American Guns" about a family of gun makers. Some radio stations stopped playing pop star Ke$ha's bubbly new single "Die Young" to avoid any potential offense. Glitzy red carpet premieres for violent upcoming new movies "Jack Reacher," starring Tom Cruise, and "Django Unchained" starring Jamie Foxx, were canceled out of respect for the Newtown victims, but both movies will open in theaters as planned in the next seven days. INSENSITIVE TODAY, OK TOMORROW? The Parents TV Council praised the response of the entertainment industry this week, but said it shouldn't be confined to the immediate aftermath of such tragedies. "If a television network changes its programming because of content that could be insensitive today, why would that same content be appropriate at a later time?," council president Tim Winter said in a statement. "If producers and performers rightly question whether their industry is complicit in creating a violent media culture that feeds real-life tragedies, why would there be a later time to produce and distribute more of it?," Winter added. Most major Hollywood stars have remained silent about the potential influence of violent movies on U.S. society. But "Django Unchained" star Foxx was quoted as saying the movie industry should not shirk its responsibility. "We cannot turn our back and say that violence in films or anything that we do doesn't have a sort of influence," Foxx was quoted as saying while promoting the film in New York. Director Quentin Tarantino called the Newtown shootings "a horrible tragedy," but in an interview with CNN on Monday he declined to link screen violence with real life events. "This has gone back all the way down to Shakespeare's days ... when there's violence in the street, the cry becomes 'blame the playmaker.' And you know, I actually think that's a very facile argument to pin on something that's a real life tragedy," Tarantino said. (Additional reporting by Malathi Nayak in San Francisco, editing by Stacey Joyce) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 19, 2012, 07:29:46 pm Psych meds linked to 90% of school shootings
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/psych-meds-linked-to-90-of-school-shootings/#vgFAhVbrXyVsTcFK.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 20, 2012, 10:14:17 am http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdCTqY8TYIo
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 20, 2012, 10:20:41 am ^^
Watch the video in its entirety - Ben Swann doesn't confirm anything Sorcha Faal reported. If anything, he does a good job weeding through all the fine line details. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 20, 2012, 10:23:23 am http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/scott-brown-becomes-first-republican-back-federal-assault-134440437--politics.html
Scott Brown becomes first Republican to back federal assault weapons ban 12/20/12 Scott Brown of Massachusetts on Wednesday became the first sitting Republican senator to voice support for a federal assault weapons ban after the Newtown, Conn., shootings. Brown failed to win re-election in November, however, and won’t be in Congress to vote on gun legislation. “As a state legislator in Massachusetts, I supported an assault weapons ban thinking other states would follow suit. But unfortunately they have not and innocent people are being killed,” Brown told Massachusetts paper the Republican on Wednesday. “As a result, I support a federal assault weapons ban, perhaps like the legislation we have in Massachusetts." Brown is the first sitting Republican senator to offer support for a new federal ban—something Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has pledged to introduce in January and something the White House has indicated will have the president’s support. Several pro-gun-rights Democratic lawmakers, including West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin—who spoke with President Barack Obama to discuss the issue on Tuesday—Virginia Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana have either expressed concern over the availability of assault weapons or left the door open to a discussion. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 20, 2012, 10:34:46 am Gun Grabbers Call For Re-Education Programs In Public Schools
Gun Grabbers Call For Re-Education Programs In Public Schools; IF THIS DOESN'T MAKE YOU FURIOUS AND STILL HAVE KIDS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS YOU ARE SEALING THEIR FATE UNTO BRAINWASHING BY THE GLOBALISTS TO BECOME SLAVES http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1231-gun-grabbers-call-for-re-education-programs-in-public-schools Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on December 20, 2012, 10:42:34 pm "Friends, there is a gift that God has given me: I can smell something fishy a mile away. Like Benghazi. Almost on day one, I told my husband: “The facts don’t make sense. Something is wrong here.” Last night, after I saw a talking head interview (or, I should say, NOT interview) the father of the boy who saw his teacher get shot and ran for his life with a couple of friends, I told my husband, “Something is not right here. She didn’t ask a single relevant question. So far, this boy is the only eye-witness of the gunman coming forward. She didn’t ask if the boy saw one or more shooters. She didn’t ask any details of what the gunman did first, second, third. She didn’t ask for a description of the gunman. These reporters are complete prostitutes. They could care less about the feelings of the people they interview. So why didn’t she ask any of these questions?” In fact, I could tell she was biting back questions. I looked at my husband and said, “Cal, this thing is starting to stink. By now, there should be many eye-witness accounts of the actual gunman. There should be breathless survivors talking about how this guy walked by their room, etc. About how they narrowly escaped. But so far, it looks like every single eye-witness is dead. That is IMPOSSIBLE!”
I watched the situation LIVE. There were original reports of a second man who was found in the woods that they had put in custody. This man was NEVER spoken of again. Why? The details of the shooting changed enormously from one minute to the next. Inside sources at the police departments were reporting one thing while the official accounts said completely different information. The news reports were full of such ambiguous NON statements that I was furiously looking throughout the internet to find solid evidence or eye-witness accounts to clarify. None was to be found. One example: They originally said that the shooter was buzzed in via the front office’s new video security system. Then, the news report said, “The shooter was NOT voluntarily buzzed into the school.” What the heck does THAT mean? Does that mean he forced his way through the system? Does that mean they have video evidence of his face? Does that mean that there was someone on the inside putting a gun to someone’s head to buzz the shooter in? Huh? Also, it seems highly unlikely, based on descriptions of Adam, that he could have purchased all that black ops gear! The guy is described as being so shy that he would hug the school walls when someone approached him! Also, first the news definitely says the mother was a teacher and the classroom of dead kids was her class. Then, reports are that she had nothing to do with the school. So, why the shooting there? Also, the number and kind of weapons used changed. Also, where they discovered the weapons. Sometimes they reported that all the weapons were in the school. Then they said the rifle was in the car. But they also said that the shooter used the rifle to kill every single person with multiple shots. No, something stinks here. The lack of eye witnesses of the shooter confirming the single shooter account is BLARINGLY absent. The reports of a second shooter in the woods has suddenly disappeared. The reporters are not grilling the one and only witness we know of- this little boy. Please don’t say they suddenly have even a smidge of conscience. The original statements about the shooter being buzzed into the school have simply disappeared. I was ready to let this go and explain it away as simple confusion. I was maddened by the timing and circumstances of the tragedy as concerns the upcoming UN small arms treaty & gun control. It killed me that this wack-job used LEGALLY REGISTERED weapons to do his killing. There is NO OTHER CONCLUSION, if the story is accurate, than the fact that had Adam Lanza NOT had access to those legal guns, he could never have killed those kids. He was too mentally ill to have gotten those weapons himself. He was diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and we now know that he had many, many interventions by school officials in the past. I felt that the killing of little children would be the strongest argument yet that we should clamp down on gun ownership. I just couldn’t believe the TIMING and circumstances of this event- a GIFT to the Progressives to disarm us. Who can argue with this case? I was ready for the inevitable. But a friend sent me the following links which tell a different story. Having reported the event LIVE and experienced the changing information, I am not surprised. In fact, it makes sense now. Friends. I believe there is evidence of more than one shooter. I believe this was a PLANNED event- specifically to get the UN Small Arms Treaty signed. The father of the shooter is Peter Lanza, rumored to be scheduled to testify on the international LIBOR scandal. Guess who else is rumored to be scheduled to testify on the LIBOR scandal? Father of the BATMAN theater shooter. Amazing coincidence? We will see. The LIBOR scandal is a massive, worldwide network of banks, the Federal Reserve and highly position individuals such as Tim Geihtner and Ben Bernanke that are being accused of manipulating LIBOR rates to gain better market positions. Just some of the Banks involved are: the Canadian branches of the Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan Bank, and Citibank, as well as ICAP (Intercapital), an interdealer broker.[37 It also mentions Bank of America & Barclays. It is ugly to its roots and VERY powerful people are involved. I believe our GOVERNMENT shot those kids and teachers and used Adam Lanza and his family to pull it off. They might have killed two birds with one stone. One: If these men are involved in the LIBOR scandal, they can manipulate their testimony. Two: they get gun control. How very, very clever and efficient of them, right? I hate to say it. I hate to put myself ‘out there’ with this because I KNOW how I will be attacked. But I don’t do this for anyone’s approval. I do it to help the American People. You look at these links and you decide." http://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/urgent-update-on-connecticut-shooting/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 20, 2012, 10:59:44 pm ^^
Yeah, there's just been TOO much info et al coming in, that my head has been spinning over the last week or so. This is a very good summary(although I believe the part about the fathers of both of the shooters to TESTIFY over the LIBOR scandal came from SORCHA FAAL - the other parts of their connections I believe are true). Thank you for posting this! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 21, 2012, 03:12:19 am Yeah, the LIBOR angle has been traced back to Sorcha Faal.
And the US did not sign the UN gun treaty either, all they have done is "sign on" to continue talks after they broke down in July, when the US, Russia and others disagreed with the draft resolution at the time. Yes, the Obama admin does support some kind of treaty, but nothing has been finalized to even sign yet. One must be careful what sources we read. There is a growing surge of misinformation taking place as more and more rumor and lies are tossed into the mix by people who either love to mess with people for kicks by starting rumors, or it's an intentional effort to confuse and misdirect people away from the truth. Check your sources! ;) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 21, 2012, 09:27:58 am Obama calls on public to lobby Congress on guns...
http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washington/2012/12/obama-to-address-gun-control-petition-.html get the sheeple to demand the sheeple to turn in the sheeples only protection Gun Supplier Sells 3.5 Years Worth of Magazines -- in Just 3 Days! http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/firearms-supplier-sells-more-three-years-worth-magazines-just-three Bloomberg: No One Has 'Defended Second Amendment as Much as I Have'... http://politicker.com/2012/12/bloomberg-no-one-has-defended-the-second-amendment-as-much-as-i-have/ he means defending the Government against the second ammendment Cuomo: Gun Confiscation and Forced Buy-back an Option... http://www.infowars.com/new-york-gov-mandatory-gun-sale-to-state-and-confiscation-are-options/ those options will only lead to 1 thing Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 21, 2012, 11:21:37 am California offered as national mental health model
Experts, lawmakers say Calif program could be national model on treating mental illness In response to the killing of schoolchildren in Connecticut, the federal government should consider California's strategy for dealing with mental illness, experts and lawmakers said Thursday. The Mental Health Services Act passed by voters in 2004 levied a special tax on high-income residents to pay for housing, medication, therapy and other services. The tax has helped more than 60,000 Californians. A fifth of the money is dedicated to prevention and early intervention, though The Associated Press reported in August that tens of millions of dollars had gone to general wellness programs for people who had not been diagnosed with any mental illness. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said the act that he championed has been effective in promoting early and broad-ranging intervention. He sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden, urging him to consider California's experience as he seeks ways to increase mental health resources and avert violence. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama instructed Biden to oversee the administration-wide review that also will consider gun control legislation and ways to keep society from glamorizing guns and violence. The federal government should match money raised in California and other states to create the foundation of a national mental health system, Steinberg, a Democrat from Sacramento, said at a news conference. The $1 billion in annual funding has been offset as other California programs have lost hundreds of millions of dollars due to budget cuts elsewhere in the system. Jessica Cruz, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness-California, praised Steinberg's proposal but said the nation should do even more to provide adequate funding for mental health services. Biden's office had no immediate comment, but the proposal was backed by lawmakers including Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Sacramento, who has introduced the Excellence in Mental Health Act. Her legislation would support community mental health services and make them eligible for Medicaid reimbursement. Steinberg's proposal had general support from state Sen. Ted Gaines of Roseville, a conservative Republican senator who generally opposes gun control efforts. Gaines said he will introduce legislation that would permanently bar anyone from owning a gun if they have been deemed by the courts to be a danger to others because of a mental disorder or mental illness. Current law allows such people to petition the court to legally possess a firearm after they have completed treatment. Gaines' bill would also extend the weapons prohibition to mentally disordered sex offenders. He is among several lawmakers advancing proposals to tighten gun restrictions and improve school safety preparations. On Thursday, Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, said she will introduce legislation requiring that those buying ammunition show identification, that the purchases be reported to the state Department of Justice, and that all ammunition dealers be licensed and undergo a background check. Her legislation also would ban kits than can be used to convert ammunition clips into high-capacity magazines. Gov. Jerry Brown told the AP on Thursday that he has not had time to consider the legislation being introduced in response to last week's massacre. Though California is at the forefront of regulating weapons, Brown said, "there's more things that can be done and I'm sure we'll see a lot of good suggestions." http://news.yahoo.com/california-offered-national-mental-health-131612527.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 21, 2012, 12:31:08 pm Wait, California expert at mental health? Isn't that like an oxymoron or something? ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 21, 2012, 12:42:08 pm NRA Calls for Armed Officers in Schools
The nation's most powerful gun-rights lobby called Friday for armed security guards in schools, saying that children had been left vulnerable in their classrooms. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324461604578193364201364432.html Wayne LaPierre: Hollywood, media, music, violent videos cause culture of violence... http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/21/16069537-nra-blames-media-music-and-more-for-culture-of-violence?lite Journalists seethe over NRA... http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/21/journalists-slam-nra-throughout-press-conference/ of course they do... ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 21, 2012, 01:43:34 pm NRA Calls for Armed Officers in Schools The nation's most powerful gun-rights lobby called Friday for armed security guards in schools, saying that children had been left vulnerable in their classrooms. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324461604578193364201364432.html Wayne LaPierre: Hollywood, media, music, violent videos cause culture of violence... http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/21/16069537-nra-blames-media-music-and-more-for-culture-of-violence?lite So it's the NRA that's pointing fingers at violence in the media? Then let the blame game begin... Even worse, the NRA just endorsed POLICE STATE measures. Why not endorse teachers themselves carrying firearms? ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 21, 2012, 01:52:25 pm That's basically what I posted over at PPF. They should have said, "...trained, armed citizens..."
Yet of all organizations, the NRA president advocates "security guards" at schools instead of armed citizens protecting their own children. Pretty much makes it clear where the NRA loyalties are. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 27, 2012, 08:55:27 am School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards
Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service to bad for the rest of us Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 27, 2012, 12:44:20 pm Stopping the spread of deadly assault weapons
Stay informed In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devises. To receive updates on this legislation, click here. Press releases Feinstein to Introduce Updated Assault Weapons Bill in New Congress, December 17, 2012 Feinstein Statement on Connecticut School Shooting, December 14, 2012 Summary of 2013 legislation Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation: Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of: 120 specifically-named firearms Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by: Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: Background check of owner and any transferee; Type and serial number of the firearm; Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 27, 2012, 05:24:40 pm School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service to bad for the rest of us On the surface, it makes sense that family of high-ranking government officials have security that most don't need, because those people need it. You can't let the president or his family just wander around. There are wicked people that want to do wicked things and with government officials, they could do some real damage. It's just common sense security. I have no problem paying for security in that respect. And like it or not, people of serious money are real targets too. That's just the way the world is. The sons of God need none of that stuff with God being for us, but those in the world living without God? They are fair game for bad guys. It's literally a "dog eat dog" world. "What shall we then say to these things? If God [be] for us, who [can be] against us?" Romans 8:31 (KJB) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on December 28, 2012, 12:05:59 am (http://imageftw.com/uploads/20121228/66420_10151353085230365_1475282982_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 28, 2012, 04:55:02 am Quote but we felt sharing information about gun permits in our area was important How so? What did the paper hope to accomplish by voluntarily publishing such info, public info or not. Besides, if it's public info, why spend the time publishing info that is already openly available to the public? And how are articles decided on by a newspaper? It's by CHOICE what they publish. They are not mandated to publish anything. They intentionally chose to "run with it" the story because the editor has an agenda that goes beyond freedom of the press. That isn't journalism, that's propaganda. ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 30, 2012, 06:02:02 am Facebook halts accounts for questioning narrative 'Essentially labeling such activity a thought crime' Facebook is suspending user accounts that question the official narrative behind the Sandy Hook school massacre, following a warning by Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance that “misinformation” posted on social media sites could result in prosecution. An image posted in the aftermath of the shootings that questioned whether “a clumsy 20-year-old autistic kid” could have pulled off the murders of 26 people was deleted and the user’s account hit with a three day suspension. “I was informed the reason for this punishment was the result of a meme I had shared,” writes the editor of SecretsOfTheFed.com. “Facebook told me it “…violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities”. I was further warned that “If you continue to abuse Facebook’s features, your account could be permanently disabled.” http://www.infowars.com/facebook-suspends-account-for-questioning-official-narrative-on-shooting/ Facebook bans Gandhi quote as part of revisionist history purge (NaturalNews) The reports are absolutely true. Facebook suspended the Natural News account earlier today after we posted an historical quote from Mohandas Gandhi. The quote reads: "Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest." - Mohandas Gandhi, an Autobiography, page 446. This historical quote was apparently too much for Facebook's censors to bear. They suspended our account and gave us a "final warning" that one more violation of their so-called "community guidelines" would result in our account being permanently deactivated. They then demanded we send them a color copy of a "government issued identification" in order to reactivate our account. Our account was removed from suspension just minutes before InfoWars posted its article on this Facebook censorship, and the Facebook page is now functioning at: www.Facebook.com/NaturalNews This is a separate account from our primary Facebook account, which has nearly 250,000 followers at: www.Facebook.com/HealthRanger http://www.naturalnews.com/038484_Gandhi_quote_Facebook_censorship.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 30, 2012, 06:10:35 am Buyers flock to gun shows in VA...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/gun-sales-surge-in-virginia-after-newtown/2012/12/28/0ad349e8-511a-11e2-839d-d54cc6e49b63_story.html 'It's Never Been Like This'... http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/gun-sales-surge-in-virginia-after-newtown/2012/12/28/0ad349e8-511a-11e2-839d-d54cc6e49b63_story.html Backorders Up To 6 Months From Manufacturers... http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/29/assault-rifles-ammo-flying-off-shelves-after-newtown-massacre/ Only 1 Person Shows Up To Protest Show In Denver... http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/12/29/lone-protester-pickets-tanner-gun-show-in-denver/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 30, 2012, 10:14:37 am Obama hopes to enact new gun-control measures in 2013
12/30/12 09:49 AM ET President Obama on Sunday said he would make gun control a priority in his new term, pledging to put his “full weight” behind passing new restrictions on firearms in 2013. “I'm going to be putting forward a package and I'm going to be putting my full weight behind it,” said Obama in an interview aired on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I'm going to be making an argument to the American people about why this is important and why we have to do everything we can to make sure that something like what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary does not happen again.” The president in the wake of the mass shooting at a Newtown, Conn. school has launched a White House task force led by Vice President Joe Biden to present proposals in January to help stem gun violence. Obama has said that he would seek a broad approach to the problem addressing the role of violence in entertainment and measures to improve mental health care. But he has also called on Congress to move quickly to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban and a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines. Obama on Sunday repeated those calls and said he would meet with lawmakers on both sides of the aisles to see action. “I've been very clear that an assault rifle ban, banning these high capacity clips, background checks, that there are a set of issues that I have historically supported and will continue to support,” said the president. “I'd like to get it done in the first year. I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden's task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off." But the push for heightened gun control will likely face tough political opposition, with the nation’s largest gun lobby, the National Rifle Association (NRA), saying they will oppose any new restrictions. The group earlier this month held a press conference calling for national program to place armed guards in the nation’s schools, a move they said would be more effective at preventing future tragedies like Newtown. Obama on Sunday said that he hoped to involve all “stakeholders” in the national debate over gun violence, but expressed unease with the NRA’s proposal. “I am not going to prejudge the recommendations that are given to me. I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” said the president. Obama said that he expected even firearm owners to understand the need for new regulations in the wake of the Connecticut shooting. “I think there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can't have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids,” said Obama. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/274881-obama-hopes-to-enact-new-gun-control-measures-in-2013 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 30, 2012, 07:29:13 pm I'll be honest - personally I've had a lifelong fear of guns(and was a supporter of gun control until the Lord opened my eyes over the NWO)...however, recently I'm considering buying a gun.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on December 30, 2012, 10:20:36 pm I'll be honest - personally I've had a lifelong fear of guns(and was a supporter of gun control until the Lord opened my eyes over the NWO)...however, recently I'm considering buying a gun. If you do decide to go that route, I highly recommend a basic safety course, like hunter's education. If you learn and practice the safety rules until they're second nature, you'll never have a problem with accidental discharges. It's also a great way to familiarize yourself with different types of guns and gun terminology if you haven't spent much time around them before. I was recently surprised at how much I didn't know, and how much movies and television have deceived people about firearms. For that matter, even if you decide not to buy, I'd still recommend the course for basic familiarization. It's good training. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 31, 2012, 08:04:41 am If a person is going to own a firearm, that's not bad advice. A person really needs to learn some things about about safety first, how to simply hold a gun in any situation, how to watch out for others around you, etc. Many things to learn actually. And get to know the gun laws inside and out for where you live and the Constitution. If one insists on playing in that world, know how they do it.
Personally, I earned my marksman ribbons for both handgun and rifle while in the Navy, and as a youth, guns were part of life in the south. I had my own 410 shotgun as a kid. Went squirrel and rabbit hunting with it with no adults, just a friend or two. That was then. Now? I see no place for weapons in Christianity. The weapons of our warfare are spiritual. Carnal is not where the focus should be. No guns, no knives, no battle axes. Sorry. What would you defend yourself from? You better at defending yourself than the Holy Ghost inside you? God can lay every enemy at your feet IF you have faith. We are to love our enemies, not shoot back. Protect your family? Uh, no. That isn't an excuse either, because again that isn't of faith. People try to justify guns by saying they need to defend their family, using the "What if..." scare tactic. That's bull. Take no thought for tomorrow. Look at what scripture says. And what Jesus says about who His mother and brother are. We are to focus on our faith in Jesus, not worry about others, family or not. If they accept Jesus, then they will be just fine. I can't save them, nor can any other man. I DO NOT believe scripture says guns and weapons are okay for a believer. I see no mention at all that supports weapons. Consider when the disciples asked Jesus if 2 swords were enough. Jesus said it was enough, yet there was how many in that group by then? Maybe dozens of people, and 2 swords for defense was enough? Against of all people, the Roman army? Uh, no. The swords were not for defense I believe. I believe they were for utilitarian reasons, a tool. And it doesn't even mention what type swords at that, which makes a big difference as a Roman short sword would be a fair tool living out in the wilderness, but a long sword would be nearly useless. Christians should not own weapons that are intended for self defense. Jesus is our defense. "If God be for us, who can be against us?" Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 31, 2012, 08:57:44 am ^^
Thank you for the advice here, definitely something to consider what is said above.(I may not even buy a gun when all is said and done) Not that I'm an anti-Constitution guy, but does anyone feel to SOME EXTENT, that the Constitution was written as somewhat of a SETUP for evil over the long haul? Again, I'm NOT anti-Constitution, but for 1, most of our founding fathers were Satanists and New Agers. And 2, look at some of the fruits it's bearing now - can't ban secular entertainment like rock music that's harming our youth b/c of the 1st ammendment. Have to kick out bible reading and prayer out of public schools supposedly b/c of the 1st ammendment. Christians have to own guns b/c of the 2nd ammendment(and not to look at scripture otherwise). And at the same time, other parts of it are quietly being destroyed(ie-we currently have a non-natural born citizen President). It's as if our founding fathers had the intent of building a "New World", and maybe writing this Constitution was somewhat helping them lay the groundwork. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on December 31, 2012, 10:18:41 am If government strictly adhered to the Constitution, we would not be in this current state of affairs. There had to be compromise and “interpretation” to get us here. I think the key to this is that the Constitution only works for one nation, under God. If people change their god, then everything else follows.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 31, 2012, 11:08:38 am Video: Dianne Feinstein Says Her Goal is to Disarm All Americans
Infowars.com December 31, 2012 Dianne Feinstein: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.” VIDEO: http://www.infowars.com/video-dianne-feinstein-says-prepare-to-turn-in-your-guns/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 01, 2013, 07:59:49 am That woman is old fashion nuts. A complete mental case. But then it's California.
Quote If government strictly adhered to the Constitution, we would not be in this current state of affairs. Yep, all things considered, I agree. By design, I have for a long time felt if your going to have a secular government structure, the US Constitution is as good as man has ever written. But, it's useless if the politicians don't operate it as designed, which they haven't. I believe prophecy is why the US is where it's at, not so much because politicians have mismanaged the country. God tells us the wicked shall do wickedly, and so they have. "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand." Daniel 12:10 (KJB) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 02, 2013, 04:21:27 am Columnist proposes killing NRA members, dragging Republicans behind pickups
“During my 50-year career,” Kaul wrote, “every time some demented soul would take a semiautomatic gun and clean out a post office, a school or a picnic, I’d get up on my soap box and let loose with a withering diatribe about guns, the National Rifle Association and weak-kneed politicians. Did it about 75 times, give or take.” Yet each time, he lamented, the only result was a spike in gun sales. “That’s obscene,” he opined. “Here, then, is my ‘madder-than-hell-and-I’m-not-going-to-take-it-anymore’ program for ending gun violence in America.” His first step: “Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. … Surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.” Second: “Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. … Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that ‘prying the guns from their cold, dead hands’ thing works for me.” Third: “Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.” “And if that didn’t work,” Kaul concludes, “I’d adopt radical measures.” Kaul explains his dramatic measures this way: “The thing missing from the debate so far is anger – anger that we live in a society where something like the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre can happen and our main concern is not offending the NRA’s sensibilities.” It would appear Kaul has supplied his missing ingredient. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/pry-guns-from-cold-dead-fingers-works-for-me/#44VAsgRUq5MRUcY8.99 "Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest." - Mohandas Gandhi, an Autobiography, page 446. just saying... :D Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 02, 2013, 05:50:05 am Quote to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around For that comment alone the guy should be immediately fired! Seriously, he's referencing a horrible crime that happened in Texas... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr.) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 02, 2013, 12:45:26 pm Third: “Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.” ??? The same John Boehner who's all but been in Obama's backpocket since he took over as House Speaker 2 years ago? Title: Matthew 6:1-4 Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 02, 2013, 07:57:39 pm In this Sandy Hook school shooting thread, that is...
It just seems like all of these other organizations that's NOT Christians related(and for that matter too on the Churchianity crowd as well) have this one thing in common - they like to OPENLY show their "charitable" works, and boast about them. I was on my way to Louisiana 2 weeks ago, and I heard on the radio a woman who's the head of some athiest organization complain how athiests aren't getting "respected" for their charitable works et al. Matthew 6:1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Mat 6:2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. Mat 6:3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: Mat 6:4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. Remember when Apostle John says in scripture to test the spirits? Just saying... http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/newtown-adopt-cop-campaign-sandy-hook-yoga-212025975.html Adopt a Cop campaign launched by yoga studio for Sandy Hook’s traumatized first responders 01/02/13 Police officers who were traumatized by the horrific scene at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., last month and are now running out of paid sick and vacation time may soon get some financial help from an unlikely source: a yoga studio. Linda Antignani, founder of Mother's Embrace Yoga in nearby Shelton, Conn., contacted the Newtown Police Department to ask what she could do to help after hearing about officers who have been unable to work in the wake of the Dec. 14 massacre, when a gunman opened fire, killing 20 children and six adults. The result: She has just launched an Adopt a Cop fund benefiting the traumatized officers. According to the union representing the police, those suffering from post-traumatic stress are not entitled to workers' compensation benefits under the current town statute and have been forced to use sick and vacation time. "The insurer for the town has taken a position that these officers are entitled to only what the statute allows," Eric Brown, an attorney for Council 15 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said last week. "Unfortunately for these officers, the statute doesn't allow any benefits." According to Brown, about 15 police officers have been unable to work due to trauma. Brown is hoping state lawmakers will push to change the statute for those who responded to the Newtown shootings when the 2013 legislative session begins on Jan. 9. Until then, a liaison for the Newtown Police Department told Antignani that money raised through her yoga studio's Adopt a Cop fund could be converted into Walmart gift cards, so that the officers and their families can purchase food and other items while they remain out of work. "Walmart was suggested by the liaison as the place where most Newtown officers would shop," Antignani explained. She's raised more than $180 so far. "I don't know how much is needed," Antignani added. "Anything I can get together with the generous help of my students, friends and family is a good start." Local police departments have been pitching in, too. On Christmas Day, officers from neighboring towns, including Shelton, offered to work in Newtown so officers there could spend the holiday with their families. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 03, 2013, 07:06:22 am Illinois Moves to Outlaw Modern Firearms and Criminalize Owners
Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com possible shock jock story January 2, 2012 Legislation will also target shooting ranges.Illinois Senate President John Cullerton will reportedly introduce a draconian bill today in the Illinois legislature that will effectively ban all modern firearms, criminalize their owners, and subject their guns to confiscation by the Illinois State Police. The proposed outlawing of firearms was confirmed by the NRA’s Illinois rep, according to Robert Farago, writing for The Truth About Guns website. The move coincides with a federal effort by Senator Dianne Feinstein to introduce legislation outlawing semiautomatic firearms and imposing de facto confiscation. From the Illinois State Rifle Association: Based on what we know about Cullerton’s bill, firearms that would be banned include all semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns. Pump action shotguns would be banned as well. This would be a very comprehensive ban that would include not only so-called ‘assault weapons’ but also such classics as M1 Garands and 1911-based pistols. There would be no exemptions and no grandfathering. You would have a very short window to turn in your guns to the State Police to avoid prosecution. Folks monitoring the effort to disembowel the Second Amendment in the Land of Lincoln say the bill has a 50-50 chance of passage. They advise gun owners both in and out-of-state to call Senate President Cullerton at 217-782-2000 and contact state representatives at ilga.gov. In addition to outlawing a large number of firearms, the legislation will target shooting ranges in the state. “Not only are they going after semi-autos and magazines, but they are going after ranges,” the Illinois Carry website reports. more: http://www.infowars.com/illinois-moves-to-outlaw-modern-firearms-and-criminalize-owners/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 04, 2013, 01:21:28 am "Outlaw modern firearms"? What does that mean? A ban on ANY firearms made in modern times? That won't fly.
The courts have already ruled while some restrictions are possible, outright bans are not. We just went through this not long ago and I think it was the DC ban that was overturned. But here's the deal; if the public doesn't know any different constitutionally, politicians will get away with it. A government that wants to disarm their public is a government that lives in fear of it's population. Shock jock story I think is a real possibility, because I don't see how such a ban could come close to passing, but it would still be unconstitutional. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 05, 2013, 06:26:41 pm White House weighs broad gun-control agenda in wake of Newtown shootings
The White House is weighing a far broader and more comprehensive approach to curbing the nation’s gun violence than simply reinstating an expired ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, according to multiple people involved in the administration’s discussions. A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said. To sell such changes, the White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association that one source said could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses. White House aides have also been in regular contact with advisers to New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), an outspoken gun-control advocate who could emerge as a powerful surrogate for the Obama administration’s agenda. The Biden group, formed last month after the massacre at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school that killed 20 children and six adults, plans to submit a package of recommendations to President Obama this month. Once Obama’s proposals are set, he plans to lead a public-relations offensive to generate popular support. “They are very clearly committed to looking at this issue comprehensively,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, who has been involved in the discussions. The proposals under consideration, he added, are “a deeper exploration than just the assault-weapons ban.” The gun-control push is just one part of an ambitious political agenda that Obama has pledged to pursue after his decisive reelection victory in November, including comprehensive immigration reform, climate-change legislation and long-term deficit reduction. Obama also faces a reshuffling of his Cabinet, and a looming debate over the nation’s debt ceiling that will compete for his time and attention in the coming months. In addition to potential legislative proposals, Biden’s group has expanded its focus to include measures that would not need congressional approval and could be quickly implemented by executive action, according to interest-group leaders who have discussed options with Biden and key Cabinet secretaries. Possibilities include changes to federal mental-health programs and modernization of gun-tracking efforts by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. “Simply coming up with one or two aspects of it really falls short of the magnitude of the gun issue in the country,” said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum. Wexler was among a dozen law enforcement leaders who met with Biden and other administration leaders in the aftermath of the Dec. 14 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. The Dec. 20 summit, which stretched an hour beyond an allotted one hour, included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Biden “wanted to talk to us about the assault-weapons ban, automatic weapons, high-capacity magazines,” said Hennepin County (Minn.) Sheriff Richard Stanek, president of the Major County Sheriffs’ Association. The vice president said the White House group would consider a variety of proposals — from requiring background checks for all gun buyers to creating a new database that would allow the ATF to track all gun sales, according to participants. Stanek said the meeting also included significant discussion of mental-health issues, violence in video games and movies, and the poor quality of information contained in databases used to conduct criminal background checks before issuing gun permits. Some of the options the administration is considering may not ultimately be included in Obama’s package. A White House spokesman said Biden’s group was in the midst of its review and has made no decisions on its final recommendations. Politically rocky terrain The White House is also developing strategies to navigate the rocky and emotionally fraught terrain of gun politics once final policy decisions are made. The administration is quietly talking with a diverse array of interest groups, including religious leaders, mental-health professionals and hunters, to build as broad a coalition as possible, those involved in the discussions said. The president is expected to face fierce opposition from the NRA and its allies in Congress, including most Republicans and some Democrats. But Biden signaled to those involved in the policy discussions that the White House is not afraid of taking on the NRA, the nation’s largest gun rights group. At the Dec. 20 meeting, according to Stanek, when one law enforcement leader suggested focusing on only the most popular proposals, Biden responded: “Look, what I’m asking you for is your candid opinion and ideas about extreme gun violence. Leave the politics to the president. That’s our job with Congress.” NRA officials declined a request for comment. In response to the shooting in Newtown, Wayne LaPierre, the group’s executive vice president, called for installing armed police officers in every school. “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre said at a news conference Dec. 21. One potential strategy would be to win support for specific measures from interest groups that are normally aligned with the NRA, according to one person who works closely with the administration on gun-related issues and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. For instance, this person suggested, Wal-Mart and other major gun retailers may have an incentive to support closing a loophole that allows people to bypass background checks if they purchase firearms at gun shows or through other types of private sales. That could result in more people buying guns in retail stores. Timing is imperative Obama’s advisers have calculated that the longer they wait, the more distance there is from the Newtown massacre and the greater the risk that the bipartisan political will to tackle gun violence will dissipate. “This is not something that I will be putting off,” Obama said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview broadcast last Sunday. At the White House meeting, Stanek said, “the vice president indicated that there was a very short timeline for him to get back to the president with his recommendations because the American public has a short memory.” Already, three weeks after the Newtown shooting, gun-control advocates are growing impatient with a legislative process that is just beginning. “As we get involved in these ad nauseam debates over the Second Amendment, our children are still at risk,” said Jon Adler, national president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. “Debating is not the action verb we need to protect our children.” With the start of the 113th Congress last week, several lawmakers filed bills to address gun violence. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who co-wrote a 1994 assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004, plans to introduce legislation this month that would ban the sale or manufacture of about 120 firearms, including semiautomatic rifles and military-style handguns, as well as ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. The expired federal assault-weapons ban prohibited the manufacturing of 19 models of semiautomatic guns classified as assault weapons, including certain rifles and shot guns. The law also banned ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. But it did not ban the sale of previously manufactured assault weapons or high-capacity magazines. Since the law’s sunset, efforts in Congress over the past decade to reinstate the ban have faced stiff opposition from the NRA and the firearms industry and have never passed. Adler, who has submitted recommendations to Biden’s group, said he has told administration officials that they need to pursue multiple measures to increase their chances of success. “We can’t put all our protection-effort eggs in one basket with one piece of legislation,” he said. “We’ve got to do more than that.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-weighs-broad-gun-control-agenda-in-wake-of-newtown-shootings/2013/01/05/d281efe0-5682-11e2-bf3e-76c0a789346f_print.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 05, 2013, 09:27:35 pm ???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IAsVmzBX8F0 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 06, 2013, 03:56:25 am ??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IAsVmzBX8F0 How is a fake pic in a British newspaper proof this is all fake? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 06, 2013, 08:37:02 am How is a fake pic in a British newspaper proof this is all fake? The point of the video is that some woman's young daughter was taken from off of her facebook(or something like that) page and was put as one of the victims of the CT shooting. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 06, 2013, 08:38:10 am The point of the video is that some woman's young daughter was taken from off of her facebook(or something like that) page and was put as one of the victims of the CT shooting. That is quite common in BRITTISH trash rags, but I fail to see how that shows this shooting was fake? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 06, 2013, 08:46:33 am That is quite common in BRITTISH trash rags, but I fail to see how that shows this shooting was fake? For the record, no, this shooting was NOT fake(I don't see how anyone could think this). However, I do feel they brought in a number of "actors" made as witnesses into the MSM to juice things up, make it look like a "lone wolf" did it, and ultimately to help push for agendas like gun control/gun confiscation.(ie-the Parkers, that middle aged guy FOX News did a long interview with, the young blond haired teacher, etc) With that being said - don't be surprised that the next FF school shooting happens in a heavily gun rights state like Texas, where ultimately the NWO minions could have more ammunition to push their gun control agenda. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 08:04:46 am Mom hides children, shoots intruder 5 times...
http://myfox8.com/2013/01/06/ga-mom-shoots-intruder-5-times-saves-children/ CHICAGOLAND: Gun Shops Report Empty Cases, Bare Shelves, Phones Ringing Off Hook... http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/01/04/gun-store-owners-inventory-flying-off-the-shelves-amid-legislative-debate/ Show Draws Thousands Looking to Stock Up in CA... http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Ontario-Convention-Center-Crossroads-of-the-West-Gun-Show-Firearms-185769562.html 8,000 flock in Florida... http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Orlando-gun-show-sales-reach-record-amidst-control-debate/-/1637132/18025678/-/45x3e3/-/index.html Buchanan warns of 'revolution'... http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/01/05/buchanan_there_would_be_a_revolution_if_government_confiscated_weapons.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 07, 2013, 09:55:24 am I saw the 2 videos posted over guns Mike did - this is just a minor gripe on my part, but I wish he would acknowledge this shooting(as well as the other shootings like Aurora and Giffords) were false flags, as there's pretty hard evidence the CT shooting was. But yes, if that alleged shooter wasn't saved prior to his death, he's in Hell, I agree with that.
Again, it's only a minor gripe on my part. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 10:38:23 am I saw the 2 videos posted over guns Mike did - this is just a minor gripe on my part, but I wish he would acknowledge this shooting(as well as the other shootings like Aurora and Giffords) were false flags, as there's pretty hard evidence the CT shooting was. But yes, if that alleged shooter wasn't saved prior to his death, he's in Hell, I agree with that. Again, it's only a minor gripe on my part. what evidence is there that the CT shooting was a FF? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 07, 2013, 10:46:31 am what evidence is there that the CT shooting was a FF? You mean fake? I didn't say it was that - but there's just no evidence that that one autism teen did it all by himself. Not that I trust youtube videos, but even news footage recorded all kinds of stuff that made the whole "the lone wolf did it" look rather suspicious. As for that autism boy doing it all by himsef - autism people have temper tandrums, and even can get physical at times, but they are FRIGHTENED by loud loises, which is why they wouldn't even touch a gun with a 10 foot pole. And for that matter too, they're not exactly a threat to hurt people to this extent. But again, this isn't my issue with Hoggard - as much as I'm weary of him now, I thought he did a good job with these 2 videos on guns. Also - FF or no, you can't deny all the violent entertainment and kicking God out of public schools are reaping its ugly head now over what we're seeing now. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 11:28:43 am I dont know where your getting your information from, but your knowledge of Autistic people is WAY off. Ive yet to see one shred of evidence that this was a FF in anyway possible.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on January 07, 2013, 12:00:47 pm Ive yet to see one shred of evidence that this was a FF in anyway possible. Gene Rosen’s changing story about kids “showing up” on his lawn. Gene Rosen lying about being clueless that something was going on when his house is within eyeshot of the SH firehouse, a major staging area packed with vehicles that day. Media interviewing the principal about the shooting, then correcting the story after it was reported that she died. RIP Facebook page set up four days before the shooting, then deleted and changed after it was pointed out. Donation pages set up the day of the shooting. At least 2 people lurking in the woods by the school on video, one arrested – still unidentified. Why do the authorities need to withhold evidence from the public? Dead shooter – no trial. Same as Port Arthur. Would you say that it’s all circumstantial? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 07, 2013, 12:08:19 pm I dont know where your getting your information from, but your knowledge of Autistic people is WAY off. Ive yet to see one shred of evidence that this was a FF in anyway possible. Autism is in my family - just speaking from experiences(and from various books I've read). We took him to a gun range one time, and he got pretty scared despite the ear muffs on him. He's also scared of fireworks and being around loud noises. He can get physical and throw tandrums, but is not the kind to go out and significantly hurt someone. But this is from my own experiences.(and will leave it at that) Anyhow - as for this being a FF, will discuss it in the CT shooting thread, but will say there was just so much suspicious activity during that day, and all of those being interviewed on the MSM looked suspicious as well.(but that's just me - let everyone be pursuadeth by his own mind) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 01:27:19 pm Gene Rosen’s changing story about kids “showing up” on his lawn. Gene Rosen lying about being clueless that something was going on when his house is within eyeshot of the SH firehouse, a major staging area packed with vehicles that day. Media interviewing the principal about the shooting, then correcting the story after it was reported that she died. RIP Facebook page set up four days before the shooting, then deleted and changed after it was pointed out. Donation pages set up the day of the shooting. At least 2 people lurking in the woods by the school on video, one arrested – still unidentified. Why do the authorities need to withhold evidence from the public? Dead shooter – no trial. Same as Port Arthur. Would you say that it’s all circumstantial? I would say a big portion of it is. Was there a conspiriacy? Sure was, but not in the sence people are thinking. Many things get reported in the first couple hours of anything, and most of that stuff turns up to be wrong. Not a conspiracy, just bad reporting, as everyone wants the scoop. The people lurking in the woods were just that, curious bystanders. I do not put to much faith in when people report facebook pages that come and go. Quote Why do the authorities need to withhold evidence from the public? Its been that way since the beginning of time. Just what was the serpent in the garden? we are not told, first crime in history and we are not given the full story. This is a tragic crime, that is being EXPLOITED by any one and everyone that it gives an edge up on. but its just that, a tragic crime. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 01:54:31 pm Autism is in my family - just speaking from experiences(and from various books I've read). We took him to a gun range one time, and he got pretty scared despite the ear muffs on him. He's also scared of fireworks and being around loud noises. He can get physical and throw tandrums, but is not the kind to go out and significantly hurt someone. But this is from my own experiences.(and will leave it at that) Anyhow - as for this being a FF, will discuss it in the CT shooting thread, but will say there was just so much suspicious activity during that day, and all of those being interviewed on the MSM looked suspicious as well.(but that's just me - let everyone be pursuadeth by his own mind) My son, who is autistic, isnt afraid of anything like that. He actually likes it. Hes scarred of cherrios, but not loud noises, or guns being fired. He likes fireworks. So hopefully you can see how making a blanket statement like you made does not fit the situation. Now my dog is gun shy, loud noises scare him. Most dogs are not gun shy. So you saying that this was all fake because he was autistic is just plane wrong. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 07, 2013, 02:06:34 pm My son, who is autistic, isnt afraid of anything like that. He actually likes it. Hes scarred of cherrios, but not loud noises, or guns being fired. He likes fireworks. So hopefully you can see how manking as blanket statement like you made does not fit the situation. Now my dog is gun shy, loud noises scare him. Most dogs are not gun shy. So you saying that this was all fake because he was autistic is just plane wrong. I understand what you're saying. But for the record, no, I don't think the shooting itself was fake. There's parts of it that doesn't add up(ie-it doesn't appear any one person could have pulled off killing 26 people alone). And it didn't sit well with me when they showed photos of Obama and the Parkers smiling and laughing together. And I'll admit I went a bit overboard with the autism angle(which I apologize for), b/c I was going with my own experiences, instead of further research on this subject.(ie-the books I mentioned were older ones written by mainstream psychiatrists, who said nothing about vaccines and MSG) Ultimately, we can all agree that these tragedies are used by the NWO to further their draconian agendas(ie-gun control, alot like with Columbine). Which is why I thought Hoggard actually did a good job in his last broadcast exposing the spiritual side of all of this(comparing scripture with scripture) without going into any FF theories. I would give Pastor Mike's broadcast an A-, but everything he said in here just flies in the face over what he preached 2 years ago, which is why it deserves a solid B instead. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 02:10:29 pm Quote (ie-it doesn't appear any one person could have pulled off killing 26 people alone). Its statements like this that i do not understand. Why? Why do you think 1 person could not have done this? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 07, 2013, 02:28:23 pm Its statements like this that i do not understand. Why? Why do you think 1 person could not have done this? Just a perception of mine - personally, I can't see how only 1 person, but it doesn't mean I'm right on this or anything. ASIDE from this...let's also look at other variables...for example, all the violent entertainment like movies, music, and video games, which have flooded the market ever since I was a young boy in the 80's. While I don't endorse violent entertainment at all, at the same time, it's not like every single person that participates in these things shoots up schools. HOWEVER, you can't deny that it has really transformed the minds of our youth over the long haul. It's these types of entertainment products that has darkened minds and souls, disensithized minds and souls, etc, etc. I guess it's no surprise that in today's world, not only there are many megachurches, but they are runned by young 30 year olds who have no discernment between good and evil. Largely b/c this crowd has been exposed to alot of this stuff since the MTV/Seinfeld years. And overall it seems like the public at large seems to be apathetic over what happened at Sandy Hook(ie-you walk into any church, and it seems like noone knows anything about this event). Weren't the Columbine shooters playing violent video games and obsessed with the Matrix? It was also reported the Sandy Hook shooter was addicted to video games. And then throw in the pharmaceutical drugs that has transformed minds and souls over the long haul as well. Again, I'm not endorsing Pastor Mike, but he brought up some very good points in his Giffords shooting broadcast over our Eph 6:12 battle(without getting into FF theories). Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 07, 2013, 04:43:39 pm Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer's Account, Company Owner Claims
Bank of America has reportedly frozen the account of gun manufacturer American Spirit Arms, according to its owner, Joe Sirochman. In a Facebook post dated December 29, Sirochman wrote the following: “My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review. “After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”(emphasis added) Sirochman also wrote that he told the bank manager that “they have no right to make up their own new rules and regs” and that “[American Spirit is a] firearms manufacturer with all the proper licensing.” He also noted that he has been doing business with Bank of America for over 10 years, but will now be looking for a new bank. According to Unlawful News, this isn't the first time Bank of America has targeted a customer involved in the firearms industry. McMillan Group International was reportedly told that its business was no longer welcome after the company started manufacturing firearms – even after 12 years of doing business with the bank. http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/bank-america-freezes-gun-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 07, 2013, 05:10:30 pm Indeed circumstantial, however, evidence is objective. It takes all the pieces to make a case. Till then, it's just a theory.
That said, there are several things in the case that raises the eyebrow, like how fast they had a shooter's name on the news. Is that evidence of a FF? Nope, not by itself. It can just as easily be like Mark said, "trying to get the scoop" on a story and somebody knew somebody, and so it goes. Pretty much most of these events are what they are, till certain people make it something else for all kinds of reasons. It's easy for us as we know what drives evil in the world. We know also when and by Whom it will be put to an end. Jesus will take care of all this stuff in His time, so knowing this, we see how He has been merciful by showing us the truth, thus we have no fear of what's coming on the earth. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 08, 2013, 01:34:50 pm FAU prof stirs controversy by disputing Newtown massacre
communication professor known for conspiracy theories has stirred controversary at Florida Atlantic University with claims that last month's Newtown, Conn., school shootings did not happen as reported — or may not have happened at all. Moreover, James Tracy asserts in radio interviews and on his memoryholeblog.com. that trained "crisis actors" may have been employed by the Obama administration in an effort to shape public opinion in favor of the event's true purpose: gun control. "As documents relating to the Sandy Hook shooting continue to be assessed and interpreted by independent researchers, there is a growing awareness that the media coverage of the massacre of 26 children and adults was intended primarily for public consumption to further larger political ends," writes Tracy, a tenured associate professor of media history at FAU and a former union leader. ::) thanx AJ rest of this mess: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-fau-prof-newtown-20130107,0,4267958.story Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 09, 2013, 03:30:12 am Cuomo Close To Announcing Sweeping New Gun Control Laws
Governor Working On Deal That Would Go After Assault Weapons, Magazines A deal to give New York one of the toughest gun control laws in the nation is being negotiated by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who, sources said Tuesday, is hoping to announce the plan Wednesday during his State of the State speech in Albany. Cuomo hopes to jump-start the 2013 legislative session with a big deal that could dramatically alter gun control laws across the state. Highly placed sources told CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer that Cuomo is negotiating with Assembly and Senate leaders for a package of gun control laws that would be a dramatic response to the gun violence besetting the nation, including the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. “It’s a very divisive topic,” Cuomo said on Wednesday. “There’s a lot of energy on both sides. Some people are vehemently against’ some people think we’re out of our minds for not passing it.” Sources told Kramer the governor and lawmakers are negotiating furiously in the hope that Cuomo can announce a deal during his speech Wednesday. Sources said the package is expected to include: * New restrictions on assault weapons * Stiffer penalties for using a gun to commit a crime * New limits on the number of bullets in a gun magazine “Gun control is highly political, politically contentious situation. It is polarizing,” Cuomo said. rest: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/01/08/exclusive-cuomo-close-to-announcing-sweeping-new-gun-control-laws/ Yep all those new laws are going to stop gun violence, because the guy in Sandy Hook, he didnt break any laws, he didnt murder his mom and steal her weapons. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 09, 2013, 04:30:27 am Exactly! Since when do criminals and psychopaths obey gun laws? This is all so so stupid.
And notice how they meet in private to "hammer out a deal". Where is the public on this? Aren't "representatives" of the people suppose to do the bidding of the very people they represent? In practice, no, politicians instead decide what they will do, then tell the public how it will be, and so here we are. How many ways and examples do people need to admit that prohibition does not work, ever. So long as you deny the public, it's only the criminals that have it, and prohibition has never stopped access, it just funnels it down to select people behind the scenes. It literally creates a black market every time. History proves it. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 09, 2013, 11:20:48 am http://news.yahoo.com/walmart-gives-meeting-biden-gun-proposals-154022259.html
Walmart Gives in to Meeting with Biden on Gun Proposals By Alexander Abad-Santos | The Atlantic Wire – 1 hr 38 mins ago Less than a day after Walmart said it was too busy to meet with Vice President Joe Biden and his commission on gun-legislation proposals, the nation's largest gun seller has had a change of heart: Walmart will send a representative to a White House meeting on Thursday. CNN's Ali Velshi has the scoop: BREAKING: Walmart, having seen the light, now WILL attend Thurs' gun mtg at the White House — Ali Velshi (@AliVelshi) January 9, 2013 On Tuesday, the big box retailer cited a scheduling conflict and said they wouldn't attend the policy-making conversation with Biden, his task force, and "with gun-ownership organizations and sportsmen's groups." The decision, first reported by The Wall Street Journal Tuesday night, drew immediate criticism — that the largest gun retailer in America would skip a meeting even the NRA was schedule to attend ... well that was just bad for business: Blood all over #Walmart hands RT @theatlanticwire: Walmart's Too Busy to Talk to Joe Biden About Gun Control flip.it/FcPjw — DJ Asson (@djasson) January 9, 2013 Of course, Walmart officials changing their minds might not change those sorts of reactions. http://news.yahoo.com/walmart-gives-meeting-biden-gun-proposals-154022259.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 09, 2013, 12:18:31 pm Biden: Executive orders, action can be taken on guns
Updated: 1:02 p.m. on Wednesday, January 9, 2013 Vice President Joseph R. Biden vowed action on gun control from President Obama on Wednesday and floated the idea that Mr. Obama could use executive action to do so. “The president is going to act,” Mr. Biden said, speaking briefly before a meeting with gun safety and gun victims’ groups Wednesday. “There are executive orders, executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help [of] the attorney general and all the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action we believe is required.” Mr. Biden has been tapped by Mr. Obama tapped to head a task force on gun violence, which is scheduled to deliver recommendations to the president by the end of the month. “We are vitally interested in what you have to say,” Mr. Biden told the group. “And as the president said, if our actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.” “I want to make it clear that we are not going to get caught up in the notion, ‘unless we can do everything, we’re going to do nothing,’” Mr. Biden continued. “It’s critically important we act.” Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/9/biden-executive-orders-action-can-be-taken-guns/#ixzz2HVHRK8Zi Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 09, 2013, 02:49:19 pm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCYGEdJEi_g
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 09, 2013, 03:39:25 pm http://news.yahoo.com/biden-meets-gun-safety-victims-groups-165021174--politics.html
1/9/13 Biden meets with gun-safety, victims groups WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Joe Biden on Wednesday heard personal stories of gun violence from representatives of victims groups and gun-safety organizations as he drafts the Obama administration's response to the shooting at a Connecticut elementary school. He pledged that action would be taken. "I want to make it clear that we are not going to get caught up in the notion (that) unless we can do everything we're going to do nothing," Biden said. "It's critically important (that) we act." The meeting was part of a series Biden is holding this week to build consensus around proposals to curb gun violence after the Dec. 14 shooting in Newtown, Conn. Twenty school children were killed. Biden meets Thursday with the National Rifle Association and other gun-owner groups. Meetings with representatives of the video-game and entertainment industries also are planned. President Barack Obama wants Biden to deliver policy proposals by the end of the month. Obama has vowed to move swiftly on the package, which is expected to include legislative proposals and executive action. Participants in Wednesday's meeting with Biden included the Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence and groups from Arizona, Illinois and Wisconsin, states with spates of gun violence that garnered national attention, including the shooting in Arizona of then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Also present were two survivors of the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech that killed 32 people, as well as a stepfather of a victim of last July's massacre at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., in which a dozen people were slain. Attorney General Eric Holder also attended. Dan Gross, the Brady Campaign's president, said afterward that the meeting was "very productive and actually inspiring." He said the administration is trying to figure out how to save many others from losing their lives to gun violence, not take guns away from lawful owners. "Words like comprehensive and broad don't mean taking guns away from law-abiding citizens," Gross said as he stood on the White House driveway with some of those who shared their stories with the vice president. "This is not a debate around the Second Amendment." But as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown, Conn., shooting fades, the tough fight facing the White House and gun-control backers is growing clearer. Gun-rights advocates, including the powerful NRA, are digging in against tighter gun restrictions, conservative groups are launching pro-gun initiatives and the Senate's top Republican has warned it could be spring before Congress begins considering any gun legislation. "The biggest problem we have at the moment is spending and debt," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said this week. "That's going to dominate the Congress between now and the end of March. None of these issues will have the kind of priority as spending and debt over the next two or three months." The killing of 6- and 7-year-olds at Newtown's Sandy Hook Elementary School appeared to stir a deep reaction from the White House and Capitol Hill. Obama pushed gun control to the top of his domestic agenda for the first time and pledged to put the full weight of his presidency behind the issue. Some Republican and conservative lawmakers with strong gun-rights records also took the extraordinary step of calling for a discussion on new measures. But other gun-rights advocates have shown less flexibility. The NRA has rejected stricter gun legislation and suggested instead that the government put armed guards in every U.S. school as a way to curb violence. A coalition of conservative groups is also organizing a "Gun Appreciation Day" to coincide with Obama's inauguration this month. The president hopes to announce his administration's next steps to tackle gun violence shortly after he is sworn in for a second term on Jan. 21. Obama wants Congress to reinstate a ban on military-style assault weapons, close loopholes that allow gun buyers to skirt background checks and restrict high-capacity magazines. Other recommendations to the Biden group include making gun-trafficking a felony, getting the Justice Department to prosecute people caught lying on gun background-check forms and ordering federal agencies to send data to the National Gun Background Check Database. Some of those steps could be taken through executive action, without the approval of Congress. White House officials say Obama will not finalize any actions until receiving Biden's recommendations. Gun-rights lawmakers and outside groups have insisted that any policy response also include an examination of mental health policies and the impact of violent movies and video games. To those people, the White House has pledged a comprehensive response. "It is not a problem that can be solved by any specific action or single action that the government might take," said White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "It's a problem that encompasses issues of mental health, of education, as well as access to guns." In addition to Biden's meetings this week, Education Secretary Arne Duncan will meet with parent and teacher groups, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will meet with mental health and disability advocates. The White House said other meetings are also scheduled with community organizations, business owners and religious leaders. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 12:06:33 am Mass shooters and meds. What they all have in common.
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 - 10:15am Nicole Vowell ketknbc.com video (http://www.ketknbc.com/news/mass-shooters-and-meds-what-they-all-have-in-commo) By now the entire country is involved in the gun control debate, but guns may not be the issue. With the string of recent mass shootings in our country, all of those shooters had something in common, and it was more than just holding a fire arm in their hand. It could be that many shooters who go on mass killing sprees are misusing prescription medications, such as anti-psychotics. Dr. Joseph Arisco, a private practice Psychiatrist in Tyler tells us, "Anti-psychotic medicine is the most potent medicine that psychiatrists use." And according to professionals, like Dr. David Davis, Pharmacist; sometimes he says, "The side effects are more detrimental than the benefits of taking the medications." These mass shooters in America were all reportedly taking some heavy duty anti-psychotics or other medications during or right before their killing sprees. Aurora, Colorado killer, James Holmes, was reportedly taking a form of Prozac. Adam Lanza, who was responsible for taking innocent children's lives at sandy hook elementary in Connecticut, was reportedly taking a controversial anti-psychotic medicine called “Fantapt.” Even looking back to 1999 one of the shooters, Eric Harris, who was involved in taking a countless number of lives at Columbine High School was allegedly taking a heavy pharmaceutical called “Luvox.” According to Davis, in some cases these meds can induce aggressive behavior rather than inhibit it, Davis says, "In some cases, yes anger, aggression combativeness those type of things increase in those types of patients." The culprit to these mass shooting massacres is yet to be determined. Some think its guns; some think it's the lack of medicine for mental illness. But you can't rule out heavy prescription side effects as a possible cause of behavioral changes especially if taken improperly. Dr. Arisco says, “Anti-psychotics do not cause psychosis and do not cause people to become more psychotic. Now could that happen while you're taking those medicines of course it could." Both Doctors Davis, and Arisco say, your mental health is important. Taking the right dosage of medicine is important and consulting with your doctor regularly while on medications like anti-psychotics is the best way to control, inhibit and reduce any adverse side effects. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 12:51:49 am http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHlJ3tY7ViM
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 10, 2013, 03:25:59 am Quote Adam Lanza, who was responsible for taking innocent children's lives at sandy hook elementary in Connecticut, was reportedly taking a controversial anti-psychotic medicine called “Fantapt.” I see NBC has picked up the lie started by the fake uncle. Lanza taking that med is not true, yet the media apparently is going to run with it anyway. Typical. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 10, 2013, 04:02:57 am WHITE HOUSE THREATENS 'EXECUTIVE ORDERS' ON GUNS...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html 'The president is going to act'... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/9/biden-executive-orders-action-can-be-taken-guns/ BANG BANG: CUOMO TO ANNOUNCE SWEEPING GUN LAWS... http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/observers-see-2016-in-andrew-cuomo-speech-85983.html Hysterical governor expects rest of country to follow... http://politicker.com/2013/01/cuomo-vows-to-enact-the-toughest-assault-weapon-in-the-nation-period/ 'No One Needs 10 Bullets To Kill A Deer!!' http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/01/09/cuomos-state-of-the-state-to-include-gun-control/ NRA President Fires Back... http://politicker.com/2013/01/nra-president-fires-back-at-cuomo/ Clinton Turns Tech Speech Into Gun Rant... http://betabeat.com/2013/01/bill-clinton-ces-gun-control-samsung-tech-gap/ Iowa lawmaker calls for confiscation... http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-bans-confiscations-of-semi-automatic-weapons/ CT lawmaker calls for background checks to buy ammo... http://www.wfsb.com/story/20535647/calls-for-gun-control-grow-after-shooting-in-norwich Gun sales soar in Atlanta... http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/gun-sales-and-permit-applications-going-strong/nTqds/ 'Folks are grabbing just about any they can get hands on'... http://freebeacon.com/gun-sales-skyrocket-in-savannah/ Utah town to encourage arming households... http://www.myfoxny.com/story/20537498/utah-town-makes-arming-households-a-top-priority Ted Nugent unloads... http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/ted-nugent-gun-owners-the-next-rosa-parks/ PANIC: One Million AR-15 Magazines on Backorder... http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/panic-one-million-ar-15-magazines-backorder Police: Store clerk's gun beats thief's cattle prod... http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/20547465/police-fla-clerks-gun-beats-thiefs-cattle-prod#axzz2HX1lOhtw PRAVDA: America, 'Never give up your guns'... http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/ 'THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED' http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130110/DA3N0POG2.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 10, 2013, 04:05:52 am Quote 'No One Needs 10 Bullets To Kill A Deer!!' http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/01/09/cuomos-state-of-the-state-to-include-gun-control/ Hey MORON!!! The whole reason to ARM the population was so they could remove morons like you. It was never so they could hunt deer, or chase chickens. It was so the PEOPLE could fight against a corrupt government. Learn so history moron. Also the reason most states do not have gun registration? Is because the N@ZIS knew where to go get the weapons when they disarmed their population. History just always repeats itself.... Title: "Professor won’t back down from Newtown massacre conspiracy theory" Post by: hannahj on January 10, 2013, 06:43:03 am Professor won’t back down from Newtown massacre conspiracy theory
A media professor at Florida Atlantic University who is questioning the Sandy Hook massacre has caused controversy with his conspiracy claims. James Tracy, who writes a personal blog about conspiracy theories, believes the events that unfolded at Sandy Hook did not happen as reported. The professor writes on his blog, Memory Hole, “While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.” He suggests that there were multiple shooters and that the number of dead is incorrect. The blog post was published on the Global Research site, where it caught the attention of the Web. The academic, who is known for his conspiracy theories on 9/11 and the Oklahoma bombing, believes—as he claims on his blog and recently stated on a radio show—that trained “crisis actors” may have been employed by the Obama administration to shape public opinion on gun control. The 47-year-old, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of Iowa in mass communication, wrote on his blog, “ As documents relating to the Sandy Hook shooting continue to be assessed and interpreted by independent researchers there is a growing awareness that the media coverage of the massacre of 26 children and adults was intended primarily for public consumption to further larger political ends.” According to his faculty profile, the professor "teaches courses examining the relationship between commercial and alternative news media and socio-political issues and events." He also lists his recent work in “Censored 2013: Sourcebook for the Media Revolution. The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012." When questioned about his theories by a local CBS12 news reporter, Tracy responded, "The whole country mourned about Sandy Hook, but yet again the investigation that journalistic institutions should have carried out never took place, in my opinion." He added, "As a society we need to look at things more carefully. Perhaps we as a society have been conditioned to be duped." His blog, with 222 followers, lays out his theory in detail, suggesting that it was a training exercise in which actually nobody was killed. He writes, "To declare that the shooting 'never took place' is cause for intense opprobrium in most polite circles where, in familiar Orwellian fashion, the media-induced trance and dehistoricized will to believe maintain their hold." Speaking on behalf of Tracy, Peter Phillips, president of the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored, said in a statement to Yahoo News: James Tracy isn't promoting a "conspiracy" theory regarding Sandy Hook, but rather saying the mainstream media distorts the news, and doesn't follow up on important questions. There were reports of more than one shooter in the Sandy Hook case. Tracy is not denying that it happened, but he is saying that when such events do happen it is the responsibility of the media to fully investigate all aspects of the story and not just sensationalize the tragedy. Tracy’s employer has distanced itself from its faculty member’s remarks. Mary Jane Saunders, the president of Florida Atlantic University, said in a statement to Yahoo News that reads in part: I am sure that many of you are aware of the recent comments by a Florida Atlantic University faculty member regarding the tragic events that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14. I want to make it clear that those views and opinions are not shared by Florida Atlantic University, and I am personally saddened by any media stories that have added to the pain felt by the victims’ families. FAU joins the entire nation and people around the world in feeling profound grief for the lives lost on that awful day. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/professor-won-t-back-down-newtown-massacre-conspiracy-183530799.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 09:00:38 am I see NBC has picked up the lie started by the fake uncle. Lanza taking that med is not true, yet the media apparently is going to run with it anyway. Typical. http://www.foodworldnews.com/articles/3281/20121228/sandy-hook-victim-hoax-unveiled-fake-facebook-page-fake-uncle-adam-lanza-arrested.htm 12/28/12 Sandy Hook Victim Hoax Unveiled: Fake Facebook Page, Fake 'Uncle' of Adam Lanza Arrested Excerpt: In another hoax, a convicted felon who traveled to Newtown, Conn. and posed as the uncle of Lanza was arrested on a federal probation violation charge, according to TheSmokingGun. Jonathan Lee Riches, 35, was busted last week and booked into Chester County Jail. On Dec. 16, two days after the school massacre, Riches drove to Connecticut and sought to visit the home of gunman Adam Lanza. He videotaped part of the trip and uploaded clips to his YouTube page. Riches also made a makeshift memorial site in Newtown, where he identified himself to reporters as "Jonathan Lanza," uncle of the school shooter. He also told journalists that Lanza had been taking Fanapt, an antipsychotic drug prescribed for the treatment of schizophrenia. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 10:40:32 am OK, this is very weird - apparently, Wayne LaPierre and the NRA made a deal with Obamacare(and Harry Reid, who's supposedly pro-gun rights) stating some provision that ?gun owners will be left alone in a provision in Obamacare? Although Larry Pratt of GOA didn't buy any of it at all.
Please watch this 3 minute CNN clip and give your thoughts on this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6VKe2bNDkE Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 12:05:14 pm http://www.cchrint.org/2011/02/02/these-popular-drugs-can-make-you-violent-%E2%80%93-avoid-them/
These Popular Drugs Can Make You Violent – Avoid Them FoodConsumer.com by Dr. Mercola Some medications have been linked to an increased risk for violent, even homicidal behavior. A recent study identified 31 drugs that are disproportionately linked with violent behavior. Time Magazine lists the top ten offenders: 1.Varenicline (Chantix): The number one violence-inducing drug on the list, this anti-smoking medication is 18 times more likely to be linked with violence when compared to other drugs 2.Fluoxetine (Prozac): This drug was the first well-known SSRI antidepressant 3.Paroxetine (Paxil): Another SSRI antidepressant, Paxil is also linked with severe withdrawal symptoms and a risk of birth defects 4.Amphetamines: (Various): Used to treat ADHD 5.Mefoquine (Lariam): A treatment for malaria which is often linked with reports of strange behavior 6.Atomoxetine (Strattera): An ADHD drug that affects the neurotransmitter noradrenaline 7.Triazolam (Halcion): This potentially addictive drug is used to treat insomnia 8.Fluvoxamine (Luvox): Another SSRI antidepressant 9.Venlafaxine (Effexor): An antidepressant also used to treat anxiety disorders 10.Desvenlafaxine (Pristiq): An antidepressant which affects both serotonin and noradrenalin How legal drugs affect your mental state is a very important issue that is not getting the attention it deserves. In recent years, prescription rates for antidepressants and related drugs have skyrocketed. ... Whereas severe depression can indeed progress to suicide if left untreated, antidepressant drugs have been shown to CAUSE both suicidal and homicidal thoughts and behaviors http://www.plosone.org/article/slideshow.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0015337&imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0015337.t001 Chantix is a whopping 18 times more likely to be linked with violence compared to other drugs, with 408 reported incidents. These figures were collected from the US FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and it’s well worth noting here that only an estimated one to 10 percent of all side effects are ever reported to VAERS. So the fact that 408 acts of violence were linked to the drug and then actually reported is pretty amazing, considering the fact that the vast majority of side effects, regardless of what they are, are blamed on something else and connections are brushed aside as “coincidental.” ... Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 12:59:21 pm Biden to Offer Gun Proposals by Tuesday
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR Published: January 10, 2013 WASHINGTON — Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. will present President Obama with proposals for stemming gun violence by Tuesday, setting in motion legislative and executive actions that will encompass guns, ammunition, mental health services and violent images in popular culture. “I have committed to him I will have his recommendations to him by Tuesday,” Mr. Biden said Thursday as he began meetings with sportsman and hunting groups to discuss the gun issue. Mr. Biden did not say whether he would recommend a renewal of the 1994 assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. But he cited several other measures, including efforts to limit the availability of high-capacity magazines and the need for what he called “near universal background checks” that would go beyond doing checks at gun shows. More: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/us/politics/biden-to-meet-with-gun-advocates-including-nra.html?_r=0 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 01:05:05 pm Biden Hints at Outlawing Unregulated 'Private' Gun Sales
Closing "the gun show loophole." http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-hints-outlawing-unregulated-private-gun-sales_695080.html 12:56 PM, Jan 10, 2013 • By DANIEL HALPER Vice President Joe Biden, in remarks today before a meeting on guns, suggested the Obama administration is seriously considering outlawing unregulated "private" gun sales: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=37t-hCS9Zsw "And so the kinds of things that there's an emerging set of recommendations, not coming from me but coming from the groups we've met with," said Biden today, before a closed door meeting on gun control. "And I'm going to focus on the ones that relate primarily to gun ownership and the type of weapons can be owned. And one is, there is a surprising -- so far -- a surprising recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks. Not just close the gun show loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales." Biden will present his recommendations on gun control to the president on Tuesday. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 10, 2013, 03:20:34 pm If the blind follow the blind, both shall fall into a ditch...let them alone...
http://washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gains-100000-new-paid-members-in-18-days/article/2518123 NRA gains 100,000 new paid members in 18 days January 10, 2013 | 9:35 am The National Rifle Association reveals this morning that it has gain over 100,000 new paid members in the past 18 days as their membership has jumped from 4.1 million to 4.2 million. “Our goal is to get to 5 million before this debate is over,” a member of the organization tells Playbook this morning. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on January 10, 2013, 11:27:33 pm The English citizens have a message for Americans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9ZvwPmjJu4 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 11, 2013, 01:35:35 am Yeah, and Biden is talking about doing it by Executive Order. Uh, no.
Circumventing the Constitution with executive orders is still unconstitutional. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 12:00:28 pm http://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/school-shooting-survival-training-held-in-so-cal
School shooting survival training held in So. Cal Posted: 01/09/2013 Last Updated: 1 day ago BAKERSFIELD, Calif. - Officials from Southern California colleges and schools are being trained in how to survive an attack by a campus gunman. A two-day seminar concluded Tuesday with a simulated gunman stalking a dormitory at San Diego State University. About two dozen participants from school districts and universities in San Diego County, Los Angeles and Bakersfield, along with some police and private security personnel, took part. They practiced barricading doors, hiding, escaping and confronting the gunman. The seminar was planned months before December's Connecticut school massacre. In the wake of that attack, the San Diego school board on Tuesday ordered a safety review of all campuses. Staff will report back on ways to improve school safety and security in the event of attacks, fires, earthquakes or other disasters. http://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/csub-joins-several-southern-california-universities-in-attending-school-shooting-training-workshop CSUB joins several southern California universities in attending school shooting training workshop CSUB attends SDSU training seminar Posted: 01/10/2013 BAKERSFIELD, Calif. - Practice makes perfect. But in the case of school shootings, practice can mean the difference between life and death. That's why San Diego State University held a training workshop to teach students and staff how to handle an on campus shooter. Public safety officials from universities all over California attended, including California State University Bakersfield officials, who traveled the farthest. The two-day workshop was led by Response Options, a critical incident response company specializing in active shooter and violent intruder events. Students, staff and public safety officials were taught to proactively handle violent intruder and active shooter situations using the A.L.I.C.E. program (Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate). They may need to flee, they may need to hide, but they may also need to fight," said Response Options instructor Kerry Harris. Participants learned simple tricks like throwing things at a gunman already in the room or barricading a door shut. CSUB police chief Marty Williamson and another CSUB officer attended the workshop. Williamson said the best weapon in that situation is preparation and practice. "Infrastructure is only going to get you so far. It's the human element that will get people to survive. It's a mindset and actions taken," said Williamson. CSUB students said they welcome any training that can give them a fighting chance. "I think it's fabulous because in todays world we need that extra training for our safety and all the students here and faculty," said CSUB student Marissa Torrigiani. "Our first and foremost is the safety and security of the people on our campus. They're here to get educated, not to worry about something happening," said Williamson. Williamson said CSUB regularly undergoes similar training. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 12:16:47 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/georgia-republican-rep-phil-gingrey-favors-gun-control-162924309--politics.html
Georgia GOP Rep. Phil Gingrey favors gun control, discusses Akin’s **** remarks Speaking at a local Chamber of Commerce breakfast on Thursday morning in his home state, Georgia Republican Rep. Phil Gingrey addressed some heavy issues, including the need for gun control in the wake of deadly shootings throughout the country, and former Missouri Rep. Todd Akin's controversial comments on the campaign trail last year about ****, saying Akin was "partly right." As reported in the Marietta Daily Journal, Gingrey, a member of the conservative Republican Study Committee, said he would be open to some measures restricting high-capacity magazines and enforcing more rigorous requirements for background checks at gun shows. “There are some problems, and maybe these huge magazines even for someone who says, ‘Look, I just use an AR-15 for target practice.' But do you really need to be standing there shooting at a silhouette a shot a second or even quicker with that kind of weapon? For what purpose?” Gingrey said, according to the Journal. “I would be willing to listen to the possibility of the capacity of a magazine.” President Barack Obama plans to announce a proposal for stricter gun rules next week, and Gingrey's openness to an overhaul could help propel the Democratic administration's messaging effort. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 12:36:44 pm Iowa lawmaker calls for retroactive gun ban,
confiscation of semi-automatic weapons http://www.prisonplanet.com/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-ban-confiscation-of-semi-automatic-weapons.html David Martosko Daily Caller January 9, 2013 In an interview with the Daily Times Herald in Caroll, Iowa, state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer said governments should start confiscating semi-automatic rifles and other firearms. Muhlbauer, a Democrat from the western Iowa town of Manilla, is a cattleman and farmer. The newspaper reported that he owns a .410 shotgun, a .22 rifle and a .22 pistol. “We cannot have big guns out here as far as the big guns that are out here, the semi-automatics and all of them,” Muhlbauer told the newspaper during a December 19 audiotaped interview. “We can’t have those running around out here. Those are not hunting weapons.” “We should ban those in Iowa,” he said, adding that such a ban should be applied retroactively. “We need to get them off the streets — illegally — and even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Muhlbauer told the Daily Times Herald. “We can’t have those out there. Because if they’re out there they’re just going to get circulated around to the wrong people. Those guns should not be in the public’s hands. There are just too many guns.” Full article here http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-bans-confiscations-of-semi-automatic-weapons/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 01:43:48 pm Larry Pratt, head of Gunowners of America...BEWARE of this guy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Pratt Excerpts: In the 1996 U.S. presidential election, Pratt served as a co-chairman of Pat Buchanan's campaign. In February 1996, the liberal Center for Public Integrity issued a report that claimed Pratt spoke at meetings organized by white supremacist and militia leaders. Pratt denied any tie to racism, calling the report a smear aimed at hurting Buchanan before the New Hampshire primary election. However, Pratt was forced to resign his position with the Buchanan campaign ----------------------------- Larry Pratt has also been listed as a member of the Council for National Policy (CNP).[15][16][17] A January 13, 2001 article in The Guardian explored Pratt's relationship with then-Attorney General nominee John Ashcroft, stating they knew each other from the CNP.[18] The January 11, 2001 edition of TIME Magazine included an article on Pratt and Ashcroft's relationship Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 08:37:08 pm Yes, I understand the importance of the 2nd ammendment and the need for citizens to carry concealed weapons, BUT how would arming a mere few janitors solve the issue? No, nothing against janitors, but nonetheless it's not like they have a big staff of them in one school alone, and them alone should be armed? ???
http://news.yahoo.com/could-janitors-one-schools-line-defense-202648003.html Could janitors be one school's line of defense? TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) — A rural school district in Ohio is drawing attention with its plans to arm a handful of its non-teaching employees with handguns this year — perhaps even janitors. Four employees in the Montpelier schools have agreed to take a weapons training course and carry their own guns inside the district's one building, which houses 1,000 students in kindergarten through 12th grade, school officials said. "It's kind of a sign of the times," Superintendent Jamie Grime said Friday. The Toledo Blade reported that the employees were janitors, but school officials would not confirm that to The Associated Press, saying only that they are employees who don't have direct supervision over the students in the northwest Ohio district. The four employees who will carry guns all volunteered to take part, Grime said. The school plans to pay for them to attend a two-day training course. "Putting a firearm in a school is a huge step," Grime said. "We're going to do it properly. These people need the proper training." The move comes as districts and lawmakers across the nation weigh how to protect students following the school massacre in Newtown, Conn., and after the National Rifle Association called for an armed officer in every U.S. school. The gunman in Newtown used a rifle to kill 20 students and six educators. Lawmakers in South Carolina, Oklahoma, Missouri and South Dakota are looking into legislation that would allow teachers and other school employees to have guns. Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst called Friday for state-funded, specialized firearms training for teachers and administrators. School districts would decide who would carry weapons but not be required to participate, and training would include how to react during a shooting. In Arizona's Maricopa County, Sheriff Joe Arpaio has said he plans to post armed volunteers on school perimeters. Residents in a Dayton, Ohio, suburb crowded into a school meeting this week to talk about whether staff members and teachers should be armed. Reaction was mixed, according to The Dayton Daily News. "We need more good guys with guns. That's the sad reality of the situation," said Jim Rigano, a Springboro school board member. Other states are trying clamp down on gun sales and bans on assault rifles. In Montpelier, school officials began reviewing security plans after Newtown and decided teachers should not be armed because their first priority in an emergency should be locking doors and protecting students, Grime said. The school already has security cameras and locked doors, and requires visitors to be buzzed into the front entrance. The proposal was not announced until just before the board voted unanimously Wednesday to arm a select group of employees after consulting with the local police chief and attorneys who reviewed Ohio's concealed carry law. The law prohibits guns in schools except in a few cases, and allows education boards to authorize someone to carry a gun inside schools. No members of the public spoke out on the measure at the meeting, board President Larry Martin told the Blade. Grime said three people attended. A letter was sent out to parents after the vote. Only three complained, while close to 150 called or sent emails supporting the idea in Montpelier, a remote city of about 4,000 residents along Interstate 80 near the convergence of Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. "It's a place where people hold the Second Amendment close to their hearts," the superintendent said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 10:35:52 pm http://news.yahoo.com/biden-voices-interest-technology-guns-203705067--politics.html
. Biden voices interest in new technology for guns By JULIE PACE and ERICA WERNER | Associated Press – 6 hrs ago. WASHINGTON (AP) — Looking for broader remedies to gun violence, Vice President Joe Biden expressed interest Friday in existing technology that would keep a gun from being fired by anyone other than the purchaser. He said evidence shows such technology may have affected events in Connecticut last month when 20 youngsters and six teachers were gunned down inside their elementary school. "Had the young man not had access to his mother's arsenal, he may or may not have been able to get a gun," said Biden, speaking of the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, who used weapons purchased by his mother to carry out the attack. Biden said the technology exists but is expensive. The vice president spoke during a portion of a meeting with video game industry representatives that was open to media coverage. It was the latest in a series of meetings he's held with interested parties on both sides of the issue as he finalizes the administration's response to the Connecticut shooting. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 12, 2013, 12:00:26 pm http://news.yahoo.com/biden-seeks-video-game-industry-input-guns-084140637--politics.html
1/11/13 Biden seeks video game industry input on guns WASHINGTON (AP) — Looking for broader remedies to gun violence, Vice President Joe Biden is reaching out to the video game industry for ideas as the White House seeks to assemble proposals in response to last month's massacre at a Connecticut elementary school. Biden is scheduled to meet with video game representatives Friday as the White House explores cultural factors that may contribute to violent behavior. The vice president, who is leading a task force that will present recommendations to President Barack Obama on Tuesday, met with other representatives from the entertainment industry, including Comcast Corp. and the Motion Picture Association of America, on Thursday. Friday's meeting comes a day after the National Rifle Association rejected Obama administration proposals to limit high-capacity ammunition magazines and dug in on its opposition to an assault weapons ban, which Obama has previously said he will propose to Congress. The NRA was one of the pro-gun rights groups that met with Biden during the day. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 12, 2013, 12:05:35 pm FYI, Brown became the first "Republican" to seek gun control measures after the CT shootings...
http://news.yahoo.com/landscape-shifts-brown-eyes-another-senate-run-085844642--election.html 1/12/13 Landscape shifts as Brown eyes another Senate run BOSTON (AP) — Three years ago, Scott Brown was a little-known Republican state senator from Massachusetts who shocked Democrats by winning a U.S. Senate seat in a special election that became a national rallying cry for the nascent tea party movement. Much has changed since then for Brown. In the Senate, he compiled a voting record more moderate than his one-time tea party allies would have liked. Just two months ago, voters said a resounding "no" to giving him a full term. Now Brown is considering whether to seize a chance to return to the Senate — in yet another special election — to take the place of Democratic Sen. John Kerry if he is confirmed as secretary of state. Democrats will be more than ready for Brown this time if he does run. "The atmosphere would be completely different," said the state Democratic Party chairman, John Walsh. He acknowledged making "unforgivable mistakes" by taking for granted the race in which Brown won the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's seat. "We are not asleep at the switch anymore," Walsh said. As the Democratic machine begins to stir, national conservative groups active in Brown's first run say they've yet to focus on a Massachusetts Senate election that could be five months away. "It's a different race," says Amy Kremer, national chairman of the Tea Party Express, which funneled a ton of volunteers and more than $340,000 into Brown's 2010 bid. "Conservatives in Massachusetts, I'm sure, are excited and want him, but it's definitely not something that people are focused on across the country," Kremer said. "What happened with him in 2010 was it became a nationalized race and people got excited. But right now, it's not on anybody's radar." Republicans familiar with Brown's thinking expect him to run but say that his candidacy is by no means assured. These Republicans spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose information about Brown's decision-making. Republicans in Washington see Brown as a chance to take a seat from Democrats, who hold a 55-45 edge in the Senate. The date of the special election won't be announced until Kerry resigns upon his confirmation as secretary of state. State officials expect the special election as early as June. Despite the time frame, Brown is in no hurry to make his intentions public, according to his Republican allies. For now, his camp is content to let speculation about his candidacy fuel steady news coverage. Since leaving office Jan. 3, Brown has conferred quietly with Republican operatives Eric Fehrnstrom and Peter Flaherty, top aides to former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Brown's allies say he is encouraged that a member of the Kennedy family will not run for the seat. Kennedy's widow, Vicki Kennedy, and Edward Kennedy Jr. have said they would not enter the contest. Kerry and Democrats in Washington are backing longtime U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, the only announced candidate, although Markey's popularity outside his north-central Massachusetts district is unclear. First elected in 1976, he is already drawing criticism from Massachusetts' small Republican class. "Ed Markey is an uninspiring, unaccomplished political hack," said Massachusetts-based Republican strategist Ryan Williams, a former Romney aide. If Brown declines to run, there are other possible Republican candidates in the wings, including former Gov. William Weld, former gubernatorial candidate Charles Baker and recent congressional candidate Richard Tisei. In January 2010, Brown faced state Attorney General Martha Coakley in a special election called after Kennedy's death the previous year. With conservatives focusing on a chance to claim the seat Kennedy had held for almost five decades, Brown attacked a favorite conservative target, Obama's health care overhaul, promising to be the pivotal vote to block the plan in a closely divided Senate. However, the Senate approved the bill shortly before the special election, which Brown won. Brown faced liberal stalwart Elizabeth Warren, a consumer advocate disdained by conservatives, in the 2012 contest for a full term. It became the most expensive Senate contest in the nation. Brown lost to Warren by 8 percentage points. Intense national interest in both elections helped send lots of money into Brown's campaign treasury. In 2010, more than 60 percent of his contributions came from outside Massachusetts, which was among the highest rates in the nation, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In the 2012 cycle, as control of the Senate was thought to depend in part on the Massachusetts race, no Senate incumbent raised more out-of-state money than Brown. Some conservative activists who helped fuel Brown's campaigns have decided that he is not the conservative lawmaker they had hoped he would be. "He had some bad votes, but he had some good votes," said Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative organization active in electoral politics across the country. Brown sided with Democrats in supporting Obama's jobs bill and later became one of just three Republicans who voted for the Dodd-Frank law that sought to toughen financial-industry regulations. He also voted for the New START treaty to further limit U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals. On one make-or-break issue for tea party activists, Brown remained firm: his opposition to the president's health care overhaul. That issue lost some of its power after its passage by Congress in 2010 and the Supreme Court's decision in June 2012 that it was indeed constitutional. So far, there's no conservative rallying cry ahead of the 2013 special election. But in a year with few high-profile elections, Republican strategist Ron Kaufman said, "some things become bigger than they are." "It will be different, but I think that there's still an awful lot of people very, very angry right now at Washington," said Kaufman, Massachusetts' national Republican committeeman. "If they really want to slow down the president, this would be the way to do it." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 12:58:26 pm 1/14/13
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-some-gun-control-measures-i-can-accomplish-through-executive-action_695381.html Obama: Some Gun Control Measures 'I Can Accomplish Through Executive Action' "I'm confident that there are some steps that we can take that don't require legislation and that are within my authority as president." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 01:38:53 pm Lawmaker Plans Bill To Lift Immunity For Gun Manufacturers And Dealers
by Carrie Johnson January 14, 2013 9:40 AM Add this to the list of proposals to overhaul the gun industry: Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., says he will introduce legislation this week to roll back legal immunity for gun manufacturers and dealers. Schiff tells NPR there's no need for the 2005 law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act to remain on the books. That law gave gun makers, gun dealers and trade groups immunity from most negligence and product liability lawsuits. "Good gun companies don't need special protection from the law," Schiff says, "Bad companies don't deserve it." Schiff says his proposal would allow lawsuits to move through federal and state courts if plaintiffs could show that gun dealers or makers were negligent, for example, by failing to protect their stores of weapons and failing to keep customers who have felony convictions from getting their hands on guns. Schiff is working with the Brady Center, an organization that has pushed for greater accountability for the gun industry, on his legislation. Schiff and the Brady Center say courts have interpreted the 2005 law too broadly and have dismissed lawsuits by victims and their relatives. "When someone makes a dangerous product or acts negligently, they ought to be held liable otherwise it encourages irresponsibility," Schiff says. Any such move is expected to be hotly contested by the National Rifle Association, which has called the 2005 PLCAA law "vitally important" to end efforts by gun control groups to "bankrupt the American firearms industry through reckless lawsuits." http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/01/14/169317524/lawmaker-plans-bill-to-lift-immunity-for-gun-manufacturers-and-dealers Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 14, 2013, 03:56:17 pm Quote "When someone makes a dangerous product or acts negligently, they ought to be held liable otherwise it encourages irresponsibility," Schiff says. Now that is just stupid to say. Companies are already liable for the products. It's called a manufacturer's warranty (typically one year). Federally mandate no less if I'm not mistaken. What he's really saying is he wants to control the products themselves. It's obvious, but the issue is with control of the product, not how dangerous it may or may not be. And if a company is negligent, there are avenues for dealing with that in court as well. It's all on the law books already. I agree, this is an attempt to open up manufacturers to law suits so the anti-gun lobby can tie them up in court. It's a known tactic in business. You can guarantee that if there are lawyers involved, there will be law suits. It sounds like a tactic MADD is using against places that serve alcohol, claiming the bar/server is responsible for the person who was drinking there, once they leave the premises. Seems rather it's, "informed consent". The customer is informed of the risks and dangers of a firearm, but then the buyer is on their own in use of the firearm once they leave the store/seller. If a trigger fails to operate as designed, that's on the manufacturer, but if that same trigger is pulled while aimed at a human being, that is on the bearer of the firearm. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 04:13:08 pm http://news.yahoo.com/54-000-mexicans-sign-petition-us-gun-control-203836993.html
54,000 Mexicans sign petition for US gun control Associated Press – 1 hr 33 mins ago MEXICO CITY (AP) — More than 54,000 Mexicans have signed a petition calling on the United States to take further steps to combat weapons trafficking. Mexico says the majority of guns used by the country's violent drug cartels are smuggled over the border from the United States. Mexico's best-known anti-violence activist and a prominent intellectual presented the petition at the U.S. embassy Monday. Activist Javier Sicilia said "The United States is partly responsible for our humanitarian tragedy." About 70,000 people have died in Mexico in drug violence since 2006, according to the written copy of a speech presented by Mexico's interior secretary in December. Before the activists presented their petition, President Barack Obama said Monday he would present a new U.S. gun control plan within days. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 14, 2013, 04:41:29 pm Quote Mexico says the majority of guns used by the country's violent drug cartels are smuggled over the border from the United States. I'd like to see their proof it's the majority, but one thing is clear, the US government has been arming the cartels, and got caught, and more than one person's blood is on their hands as a direct result. Has anybody gone to jail? Nope, except cartel members of course. All that's happened on the US side is three state level officials were fired or resigned. And the director of the whole operation got presidential immunity. Figure that one out! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 15, 2013, 04:11:03 am White House readies 19 executive orders on guns...
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/biden-guns-executive-actions-86187.html?hp=t1_3 CONGRESSMAN WARNS OBAMA: IMPEACH YOU http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/14/gop-congressman-threatens-impeachment-if-obama-uses-executive-action-for-gun-control/ Bloomberg urges Obama to defy Congress...he means violate the CONSTITUTION http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4574 FLASHBACK: Charlton Heston: 'From My Cold, Dead Hands!' http://cnsnews.com/news/article/flashback-charlton-heston-my-cold-dead-hands Rapper Goes On TWITTER Tirade Against Obama... http://wxrt.cbslocal.com/2013/01/14/shyne-threatens-obama-with-kanye-west-meltdown-over-chicago-murders/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 15, 2013, 04:22:01 am That Bloomberg is a stone-cold socialist globalist thug. And I agree, he means violate the Constitution, all in the name of the "greater good".
The attitude is do it, even if the House and Senate say no. If Obama pulls an Executive Order stunt, I'm not sure how people will react, but it clearly would be a violation of the Constitution, making our own president a traitor to the Constitution, which really he already is and subject to arrest for such treason. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 09:03:23 am That Bloomberg is a stone-cold socialist globalist thug. And I agree, he means violate the Constitution, all in the name of the "greater good". The attitude is do it, even if the House and Senate say no. If Obama pulls an Executive Order stunt, I'm not sure how people will react, but it clearly would be a violation of the Constitution, making our own president a traitor to the Constitution, which really he already is and subject to arrest for such treason. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't George HW Bush pull an EO on a gun control measure when he was President? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 09:26:30 am CONGRESSMAN WARNS OBAMA: IMPEACH YOU http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/14/gop-congressman-threatens-impeachment-if-obama-uses-executive-action-for-gun-control/ FYI, BEWARE of this guy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Stockman A Houston Chronicle article reminds that "Stockman’s two years in Congress were marked by weirdness, such as an article in Guns & Ammo magazine that appeared under his byline in which he suggested the then-new Clinton administration raided the Branch Davidian compound in Waco on April 19, 1993, to justify a ban on assault weapons.[citation needed] Stockman said, in reports from the Associated Press in May 1995, that he stood by his article, which was published after the bombing on April 19, 1995 of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.[citation needed] A couple of weeks after he defended the article, he told the Associated Press that he regretted writing it, mostly for its timing. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 09:27:55 am http://www.npr.org/2013/01/15/169385630/n-y-poised-to-be-1st-to-pass-post-massacre-gun-bill?ft=1&f=1014
1/15/13 N.Y. Poised To Be 1st To Pass Post-Massacre Gun Bill Days after calling for an overhaul of gun control in New York following the Connecticut school shooting, Gov. Andrew Cuomo worked out a tough proposal on gun control with legislative leaders who promised to pass the most restrictive gun law in the nation. The measure passed the Senate 43-18 on the strength of support from Democrats, many of whom previously sponsored the bills that were once blocked by Republicans. The Democrat-led Assembly gaveled out before midnight and planned to take the issue up at 10 a.m. Tuesday. It is expected to pass easily. "This is a scourge on society," Cuomo said Monday night, one month after the Newtown, Conn., shooting that took the lives of 20 first graders and six educators. "At what point do you say, 'No more innocent loss of life.'" "It is well-balanced, it protects the Second Amendment," said Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos of Long Island. "And there is no confiscation of weapons, which was at one time being considered. "This is going to go after those who are bringing illegal guns into the state, who are slaughtering people in New York City," Skelos said. "This is going to put people in jail and keep people in jail who shouldn't be out on the street in the first place." "This will be the toughest gun control package in the nation," said Sen. Jeffrey Klein, leader of the Independent Democrat Conference that shares majority control with Republican senators. "All in all, it is a comprehensive, balanced approach that will save lives," Klein said in an interview. Cuomo said he wanted quick action to avoid a run on assault rifles and ammunition as he tries to address what he estimates is about 1 million assault rifles in New York state. He made it a centerpiece of his progressive agenda in last week's State of the State address. Republican Sen. Greg Ball called that political opportunism in a rare criticism of the popular and powerful governor seen by his supporters as a possible candidate for president in 2016. "We haven't saved any lives tonight, except one: the political life of a governor who wants to be president," said Ball who represents part of the Hudson Valley. "We have taken an entire category of firearms that are currently legal that are in the homes of law-abiding, tax paying citizens. ... We are now turning those law-abiding citizens into criminals." The governor confirmed the proposal, previously worked out in closed session, called for a tougher assault weapons ban and restrictions on ammunition and the sale of guns, as well as a mandatory police registry of assault weapons, grandfathering in assault weapons already in private hands. It would create a more powerful tool to require the reporting of mentally ill people who say they intend to use a gun illegally and would address the unsafe storage of guns, the governor confirmed. Under current state law, assault weapons are defined by having two "military rifle" features spelled out in the law. The proposal would reduce that to one feature and include the popular pistol grip. Private sales of assault weapons to someone other than an immediate family would be subject to a background check through a dealer. Also Internet sales of assault weapons would be banned, and failing to safely store a weapon could be subject to a misdemeanor charge. Ammunition magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10, and current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge. In another provision, a therapist who believes a mental health patient made a credible threat to use a gun illegally would be required to report the incident to a mental health director who would have to report serious threats to the state Department of Criminal Justice Services. A patient's gun could be taken from him or her. The legislation also increases sentences for gun crimes including the shooting of a first responder that Cuomo called the "Webster provision." Last month in the western New York town of Webster, two firefighters were killed after responding to a fire set by the shooter, who eventually killed himself. Legislators wouldn't comment on the tentative deal or the provisions discussed in closed-door conferences. "It's a tough vote," said Senate Deputy Majority Leader Thomas Libous of Broome County. "This is a very difficult issue depending on where you live in the state. I have had thousands of emails and calls ... and I have to respect their wishes." He said many of constituents worry the bill will conflict with the Second Amendment's right to bear arms while others anguish over shootings like at Newtown, Conn., and Columbine, Colo. A vote Monday would come exactly one month after a gunman killed 20 children and six educators inside Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. The closed-door meetings prompted about a dozen gun workers to travel more than two hours to Albany to protest the legislation they say could cost 300 to 700 jobs in the economically hard-hit Mohawk Valley. "I have three small kids myself," said Jamie Rudall, a unionized worker who polishes shotgun receivers. "So I know what it means, the tragedy ... we need to look at ways to prevent that, rather than eliminate the rights of law-abiding citizens." In the gun debate, one concern for New York is its major gun manufacturer upstate. Remington Arms Co. makes the Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle that was used in the Connecticut shootings and again on Christmas Eve when the two firefighters were slain in Webster. The two-century-old Remington factory in Ilion in central New York employs 1,000 workers in a Republican Senate district. Assemblyman Marc Butler, a Republican who represents the area, decried the closed-door meetings by Senate Republicans and the Democratic majority of the Assembly as "politics at its worst." The bill would be the first test of the new coalition in control of the Senate, which has long been run by Republicans opposed to gun control measures. The chamber is now in the hands of Republicans and five breakaway Democrats led by Klein, an arrangement expected to result in more progressive legislation. Former Republican Sen. Michael Balboni said that for legislators from the more conservative upstate region of New York, gun control "has the intensity of the gay marriage issue." In 2011, three of four Republicans who crossed the aisle to vote for same-sex marriage ended up losing their jobs because of their votes. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 15, 2013, 10:28:34 am New York Has Gun Deal, With Focus on Mental Ills
Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and lawmakers agreed on Monday to a broad package of changes to gun laws that would expand the state’s ban on assault weapons and would include new measures to keep guns away from the mentally ill. rest: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/nyregion/new-york-legislators-hope-for-speedy-vote-on-gun-laws.html?partner=MYWAY&ei=5065&_r=1& N.Y. Assembly Speaker Silver: ‘We Are Going To Ban Assault Weapons’ Among New Laws, Gun Owners Would Have To Renew License Every 5 Years http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/01/14/ap-sources-new-york-has-tentative-deal-on-gun-control/ The n@zi party did the same thing, so they know where to come and get the guns. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 10:38:50 am ???
http://investmentwatchblog.com/breaking-confirmed-wal-mart-is-not-going-to-order-any-more-ammo/#Q9df01EHLdW68zHA.99 BREAKING & CONFIRMED: Wal Mart Is NOT Going To Order Any More Ammo. January 12th, 2013 do not have a link as of yet but here is what I have found out… Stopped by my local Wal Mart this morning. They are out of almost every kind of ammo. I asked to talk to the person in charge of ordering to see if they had any information on this subject. The manager I talked to said they had not heard anything…BUT. She tried to order some .223 as I was standing there. She said the order was being rejected by the corporate office. Said she had never had that happen. She called corporate as I was standing there. And was told this. “As of right now Wal Mart is not going to be making any new orders of ammo because of the upcoming decision on the second amendment”. Said, “As of right now we are unsure of what new legislation might be coming, and because of this, we are suspending new orders. We will continue to sell what is already in stock in stores and at our distribution centers, but any new orders will not be shipped until the issue is resolved”. So after they run out, there will be no restocking until Obama makes his decision…Hows that change working out for you now? As I said, I dont have a link, but you can call Wal Mart headquarters at 1-800-925-6278 for yourself and ask. After the answer press 2 then 1 then 1 again and wait to talk to a rep. I just did this myself and was told the same thing. Something must have changed at the meeting they had on Thursday. Guess we will have to wait and see what Obama has in store for us next. Guys, I am not making this up…Call and find out for yourself. Another confirmation: Home - Audio Blogs > WalMart Federal Gun Control I just recorded the audio to me calling the corporation and this is all too real. It all comes back to “we have to wait for the President to revise the new law for the Federal Gun Control Act. Then we will change our policy”. – sonarx Audio: http://yourlisten.com/channel/content/16942146/WalMart_Federal_Gun_Control?rn=95wy2gchqm80 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 10:52:37 am 18 Facts That Prove That Piers Morgan Is Flat Out Lying About Gun Control 1/12/13 http://theintelhub.com/2013/01/12/18-facts-that-prove-that-piers-morgan-is-flat-out-lying-about-gun-control/ Excerpt: The following are 18 facts that prove that Piers Morgan is flat out lying about gun control… #1 The UK has approximately 125 percent more **** victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #2 The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #3 Piers Morgan continues to insist that there are more than 11,000 gun murders in the United States every year. But that is flat out wrong. According to the FBI, there were 8,583 gun murders in the United States during 2011. And as Ben Swann recently pointed out, 400 of those were justifiable homicides by law enforcement and 260 of those were justifiable homicides by private citizens. #4 The United States is #1 in the world in gun ownership, and yet it is only 28thin the world in gun murders per 100,000 people. #5 The violent crime rate in the United States actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. This was during an era when gun laws in the United States generally became much less restrictive. #6 The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. So has this reduced crime? Of course not. As I wrote about the other day, the murder rate in Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to be “the deadliest global city“. If you can believe it, there were about as many murders in Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire nation of Japan. #7 After the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring every home to have a gun, the crime rate dropped by more than 50 percent over the course of the next 23 years. #8 Approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year. #9 Overall, guns in the United States are used 80 times more often to prevent crime than they are to take lives. #10 Only about 3.5 percent of the gun murders in the United States are caused by rifles. #11 According to Gallup, an all-time record 74 percent of all Americans are against a total handgun ban in the United States. #12 Down in Australia, gun murders increased by about 19 percent and armed robberies increased by about 69 percent after a gun ban was instituted. #13 When Piers Morgan claims that there are only 35 gun murders in the UK per year, he isn’t exactly being accurate. According to official statistics, there were59 gun murders in the UK in 2011. It is also important to keep in mind that gun crime was already super low even before the gun ban in the UK was instituted, and that a 2009 article in The Telegraph declared that gun crime had doubledover the past decade even though it is widely acknowledged that crime statistics in the UK are massively underreported. #14 The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU. #15 The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU. #16 A 2009 article in The Telegraph had this stunning headline: “UK is violent crime capital of Europe“. #17 Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the truth is that the UK is a far more violent society than the United States is. In one recent year, there were2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK? #18 According to Gun Owners of America, the governments of the world slaughtered more than 170 million of their own people during the 20th century. The vast majority of those people had been disarmed by their own governments prior to being slaughtered. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 10:56:35 am From the ^^ link
Excerpt: In fact, right now there seems to be some sort of a nationwide backlash against gun advocates. A few high profile gun advocates have even ended up dead in recent days. For example, self-described “gun nut” Keith Ratliff, the owner of the ninth most popular channel on YouTube, was found dead at his business on January 3rd… Keith Ratliff, 32, was a channel producer for FPSRussia firearms channel, an account with more than 3 million subscribers that features videos of a man testing a variety of guns. Ratliff was found shot in the head at his business on Jan. 3, and while police don’t have a motive, they have classified his death as a homicide, FoxNews.com reported Wednesday. Not only that, one of the most prominent rifle manufacturers in America was killed in a “mysterious car crash” on January 4th. The following is from a recent articleby Mike Adams… John Noveske is one of the most celebrated battle rifle manufacturers in America. His rifles, found at www.NoveskeRifleworks.com are widely recognized as some of the finest pieces of American-made hardware ever created. (I own one of his rifles, and it’s a masterpiece of a machine that just keeps on running.) Sadly, John Noveske was killed in a mysterious car crash just a few days ago, on January 4, 2013. According to the Outdoor Wire, his car “traveled across the oncoming lane onto the dirt highway shoulder until it struck two large boulders. The vehicle rolled and Mr. Noveske was ejected.” But barely a week before this incident, John Noveske posted a lengthy, detailed post on Facebook that listed all the school shootings tied to psychiatric drugs. At the end of the post, he asked, “What drugs was Adam Peter Lanza on?” That was the last post he ever made. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 03:39:58 pm Yes, this article has a liberalism slant to it, and no, I do NOT agree what this writer has to say about Executive Orders. Nonetheless, the reason why I'm posting this here is to show that even so-called "Republican" politicians have supported some measures of gun control in the past. So pretty much any of these anti-gun control Capitol Hill people you hear are nothing but dog and pony show people(to say the least).
http://www.politicususa.com/presidents-bush-clinton-executive-orders-reform-gun-laws.html Presidents Bush and Clinton Also Used Executive Orders to Reform Gun Laws By: Sarah JonesJan. 15th, 2013 Republicans are threatening to impeach Obama over executive action on gun control, but many presidents have issued executive orders on gun control, including George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton. First Larry Pratt went impeachment nuts and then yesterday, Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) threatened that he would file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he uses the power of his office to address gun control. Stockman, who must not be familiar with the Constitution or history, claimed an executive order would be “unconstitutional” and “infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.” Stockman seems to get his news from the Daily Caller, Drudge and Fox News, because he believes, “If the president is allowed to suspend constitutional rights on his own personal whims, our free republic has effectively ceased to exist.” President Obama hinted he might use executive action to address gun violence in his presser Monday. And then, Monday night Rep. Jackie Speier told Chris Matthews of MSNBC, “Vice President Joe Biden indicated there were some 19 areas he was able to identify that the president could take action on through executive order. He didn’t go into detail on what they might be, but suffice it to say, there will be some considered that will not require Congressional action.” This translates in Republicanese to the demise of our Republic, also known as a Democrat not even using all of the executive power Republicans grant to their own party when they’re in power. Republicans are apparently unfamiliar with the constitutional legitimacy of using the executive office in this manner. Here are the facts: In 1952, the Supreme Court ruled that executive orders could not make new law. Executive orders are therefore supposed to be about enforcing a current law or helping manage the enforcement of a current law. This is a matter of interpretation, and subject to argument on both sides. Whatever the President does, it will no doubt end up being challenged and argued in court (as it should be). In 1989, then President George H.W. Bush issued an executive order halting the importation of some semi-automatic firearms after a mass school shooting Stockton, California. He based his executive order on the 1968 Gun Control Act and used it to ban the shipment of what could be considered “assault weapons” unless they were used for sporting purposes. (Question: Did the free republic cease to exist then?) In 1998, then President Bill Clinton also issued an executive order to ban the importation of more than 50 semiautomatic “assault weapons” that had been modified to get through that “sporting purposes” exemption. In 2001, Clinton moved again via executive order, banning the importation of assault pistols. One issue that Obama could address via executive order would be the sale of firearms, which is not covered under the Second Amendment. Obama could base this on the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, which levied a tax on the transfer of firearms. The President could use an executive order to institute a database and background checks centered on the sale of firearms; in other words, managing an existing law. But Obama could also follow George W. Bush’s example and use the “security” of the nation in order to justify just about any law he wanted to impose regarding gun safety (I’m not advocating this, but it’s worth mentioning since Republicans don’t seem to understand how their abuses of power can be used against them later). Obama, a constitutional lawyer, appears to have used his executive power well within the law for gun regulation so far. Reuters reports, “A federal appeals court signaled on Wednesday it was prepared to uphold a regulation designed to detect the sale of semi-automatic rifles to Mexican drug cartels, one of the few gun control measures put forward so far by the Obama administration.” Republicans have also tried to defund this gun reporting regulation. Almost all of the gun control measures we’ve undertaken have come on the heels of a tragedy. In 1934 after the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, FDR signed the National Firearms Act (mentioned above as a possible basis for Obama’s executive order) and in 2007, after the Virginia Tech massacre, President George W. Bush expanded the federal background check database. Freshman Stockman is threatening to “defund the White House” if Obama dares to use his office as if he were the President. Duly noted. Stockman served a term in Congress from 1995 to 1997 (suggesting that he might know what happened in 1989 and 1998), but reality may not be playing a large role here as Stockman is the guy who introduced “The Safe Schools Act” this month, a bill aimed at repealing federal laws mandating gun free zones around schools. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 04:18:07 pm Obama plans to surround himself with children during gun control announcement
1/15/13 White House Press Secretary Jay Carney announced this afternoon that President Obama will unveil a “concrete package” of gun control proposals including assault weapons bans, high capacity ammunition magazine bans, and closing loopholes on background checks. Carney said that the president will be joined by Vice President Joe Biden as well as children who wrote to the president after the Newtown shootings. “They will be joined by children around the country expressing their concerns about gun violence and school safety, along with their parents,” Carney confirmed. The press conference will take place Wednesday at 11:45 a.m. http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2518621#.UPXSobap7ng Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 15, 2013, 04:49:07 pm Quote and closing loopholes on background checks And I wonder just what they mean by that. What loopholes? And who decides what a loophole is? This ought to be...interesting. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 05:17:57 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/ny-gov-cuomo-prepares-sign-tough-gun-bill-214040530.html
1/15/13 N.Y. Gov. Cuomo signs tough new gun bill into law New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is signing a tough and sweeping new gun control bill into law late Tuesday. The bill limits magazines to seven bullets; increases penalties for gun crimes; gives the state more power to take away guns from mentally ill people; and bans semi-automatic rifles and handguns that have a "military-style feature," such as a bayonet lug. The ban goes into effect immediately. People who already own such guns are grandfathered in but must register them with the state. New York is the first state to pass a gun law since the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., sparked a national debate on gun violence. "I am proud to be governor, not just because New York has the first bill, but because New York has the best bill," Cuomo said before signing it. "I'm proud to be a New Yorker because New York is doing something, we are fighting back." The Republican-controlled Senate approved the bill on Monday night, with the Democratic Assembly approving it Tuesday afternoon. Blue state governors in several other states—including Connecticut, Maryland and Delaware—are also pushing for new gun laws. . Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 15, 2013, 05:25:10 pm Quote "I am proud to be governor, not just because New York has the first bill, but because New York has the best bill," Cuomo said before signing it. "I'm proud to be a New Yorker because New York is doing something, we are fighting back." Isn't it amazing to watch these politicians just take complete control and pass laws that the public isn't even given a change to have a say on. Just write it up and they sign it, regardless of what the public might say once they read the fine print. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 06:38:09 pm http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/advocacy-not-journalism-13-cnn-guests-want-more-gun-control-only-2-argue-contrary
Advocacy, Not Journalism: 13 CNN Guests Want More Gun Control, Only 2 Argue to the Contrary Published: 1/15/2013 6:07 PM ET Commemorating the one month anniversary of the Newtown shooting, CNN stacked its Monday line-up with gun control advocates and Democratic politicians. Over the course of the entire day, CNN interviewed guests about the gun issue. 13 guests were gun control advocates, including five Democratic politicians. Only two Republican guests went on to oppose further gun control measures or defend the NRA's proposal for armed guards in schools. And CNN host Piers Morgan himself pushed for stricter gun laws. "I'm in favor of a nationwide ban on military-style semi-automatic assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. I want to close the gun show loopholes and require private dealers to run background checks on all buyers at gun shows," he announced at the beginning of his show. As NewsBusters reported yesterday, eight of the nine guests CNN hosted to talk about guns between the 5 a.m. and 3 p.m. news hours were in favor of more gun control. Then, beginning with the 4 p.m. hour of The Situation Room and continuing through the 9 p.m. hour of Piers Morgan Tonight, five of the eight guests interviewed about guns wanted stricter gun laws. Only one guest stood by the gun lobby; former GOP congressman Asa Hutchinson defended the NRA's proposal for armed guards in schools. Of the five pro-gun control guests, one was the father of a Newtown shooting victim, another was the host of America's Most Wanted, another was the husband of former Democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and the other two were Democratic politicians. For instance, Neil Heslin, whose son died in the Newtown shooting, told CNN's Piers Morgan: "I think there should be stricter gun control. I'm not in favor of banning weapons or guns, but I'm definitely in favor of much more stricter background checks, regulations for gun owners. As for the assault rifles or the Bushmaster military-style rifle, I really can't see why somebody would need to own a weapon like that." John Walsh, host of the show America's Most Wanted, told Morgan: "No one is ever going to take my guns away. There is no dictator. There is no foreign country that is going to take over America and take our guns away. This is reasonable, thoughtful – the ban on assault weapons is a reasonable start." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 06:49:08 pm Luk 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
Luk 21:26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 2Tim_1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/11/portland-residents-panic-as-men-armed-with-assault-weapons-educate-the-city/ (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/kptv_assault_rifle_demonstration_130111a-615x345.jpg) 1/11/13 Portland residents panic as men armed with Two men walked the streets of Portland armed with assault weapons earlier this week because they said they wanted to “educate” residents, who reacted by fleeing and calling police. Warren Drouin and Steven Boyce told KPTV that they were forced to take drastic measure to make sure people were aware of their Second Amendment rights after 20 children in Connecticut were massacred with same type of AR-15 rifles they were carrying. “We’re not threatening anyone,” Drouin explained. “We don’t have that type of criminal behavior.” “This happens to open that line of communication, to let people know that you can defend yourself in a time of crisis or any time that you want to,” Boyce added. But KPTV’s Kaitlyn Bolduc reported that the demonstration created a “state of panic” in Portland’s Sellwood neighborhood. “Employees inside of E Hair Studio hid in the back of the salon and locked there doors, while other ran for help for fear the two were really there to cause harm,” Bolduc said. Police spoke to Drouin and Boyce and said the conceal-carry permit holders had not broken any laws. The men insisted that they understood that people were on edge after recent mass shootings but hoped residents would approach them to ask questions during future demonstrations. “We did mind the school posting signs,” Boyce pointed out. “We don’t don’t want to cause any trouble with that. We totally respect — there is a little bit of emotional sensitivity towards that and it’s just — we were walking the streets.” VIDEO LINK INSIDE Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 10:28:29 pm Problem-Reaction-Solution
State Rep. Diane Franklin Wants 1 Percent Tax to Fund Mental Health Initiatives 1/15/13 A rural Missouri lawmaker wants her state to tax certain video games to help curb gun violence. The Associated Press reports state Rep. Diane Franklin, R-Camdenton, believes a 1 percent sales tax on video games rated teen, mature and adults only would help finance mental health programs aimed at reducing gun violence such as the recent mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. What does the legislation propose? House Bill 157 proposes to create "an excise tax based on the gross receipts or gross proceeds of each sale" of video games rated by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). The tax also involves the "storage, use or other consumption" of violent video games in Missouri including "tangible personal property." This means the tax could extend to memorabilia derived from the games such as toys, clothing and video game accessories. How does the legislation hope to enhance public safety? The law hopes to procure "new and additional funding for treatment of mental health conditions associated with exposure to violent video games... ." The revenue from the tax cannot be used to replace existing revenue already in place. Franklin deems the legislation "necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, welfare, peace and safety." Therefore, if the legislation passes it will go into effect immediately. There is no mention in the legislation as to how much revenue should be generated, nor does it say whether the sales tax is just on new merchandise as opposed to used games on the secondary market. Have similar laws been considered before? A similar proposal was struck down in mid-February in Oklahoma. Democrat William Fourkiller crafted legislation in 2012 that is very similar to Franklin's idea in Missouri. A subcommittee struck down the bill by a 6-5 margin. Fourkiller, in defending the law , said it wasn't a "magic bullet" but that Oklahoma had "to start somewhere" to curb childhood violence. Oklahoma also would have taxed ESRB teen, mature and adults only games at a rate of 1 percent. Does the Missouri law have a chance to pass? CNN notes a federal appeals court made a ruling in 2003 that video games are free speech protected by the First Amendment. Ironically, it was a federal case stemming from St. Louis County, Mo., that created the precedent for video games as free speech. Senior U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh's decision was reversed by an appellate panel. The ruling came shortly after the state of Washington banned the sale of certain video games to children under the age of 17. Gamasutra reveals New Mexico also tried, and failed, to pass a similar law in 2008. What are Franklin's credentials as they relate to the proposed bill? Franklin was first elected in 2010 from Camdenton. She is a mother of two sons and served on Camdenton School Board from 1993 to 1999. She sits on the House Appropriations-Education committee. Franklin is a third-generation small business owner and comes from a farming family. Missouri Republicans currently have a veto-proof supermajority in the General Assembly. Camdenton is a small city of around 3,700 people near Lake of the Ozarks in central Missouri. http://news.yahoo.com/missouri-lawmaker-wants-violent-video-games-taxed-222800628.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 12:07:18 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-unveils-sweeping-plan-battle-gun-violence-165956859--politics.html
1/16/13 Obama unveils sweeping plan to battle gun violence President Barack Obama on Wednesday rolled out a sweeping plan to combat gun violence, including a universal background checks for every gun buyers, a ban on assault weapons and ammunition clips that hold more than 10 bullets. It was the most ambitious effort by a U.S. president to tighten gun laws in a generation and faces certain opposition among Republicans and some Democrats in Congress. Obama was set to to take executive action on 23 items including requiring federal agencies to report more information to the federal background check system and direct the Centers for Disease Control to research gun violence. But he acknowledged his more ambitious proposals would have to clear Congress. "This will not happen unless the American people demand it," Obama said, saying people from all over the country, including areas where gun ownership is popular, must speak out in favor of new restrictions. The president was joined by Vice President Joe Biden and some of the children who wrote to Obama in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School last month that left 26 people dead, including 20 first graders. The total cost of the president's proposals is estimated at $500 million. At the bottom of this post is a fact sheet, provided by the White House, detailing Obama’s proposals. But administration officials on a conference call previewing the announcement fleshed out some important details (on condition that they not be named—and left some important questions unanswered: - They wouldn’t say whether any of the steps the president is recommending would have prevented the massacre at Sandy Hook and other recent mass shootings. One senior official on the call did say, "There’s no question that both the actions that he’s taking and the legislation that he’s proposing will save lives.” - They did not provide an estimate of how many lives would be saved annually if the president got everything he wanted, saying the social science on gun deaths is not precise enough to do so. - Obama isn’t sending “specific legislative language” to Congress, the officials said, instead following his usual blueprint of laying out principles and then letting lawmakers craft a bill. - In keeping with the president’s promises, his proposals would limit the manufacture of new assault weapons and ammunition clips with more than 10 bullets—but would not affect those already on the market. - How did they settle on 10 bullets (and not seven, or 15)? One official said that number was taken from the 1994 assault weapons ban that Obama hopes to renew and strengthen. - Was the so-called "Fast and Furious" gun trafficking scandal a factor in shaping the president's proposals? "It was not," said one official. Bowing to political reality, Obama’s proposals included a wave of executive actions that circumvent Congress, where most Republicans and a few Democrats have balked at sweeping new restrictions they say could trample constitutional gun rights. The potent National Rifle Association lobby has also pledged to defeat new gun control measures. On the other side, retired congresswoman and mass shooting survivor Gabby Giffords plans to lobby her former colleagues, and national public opinion polls have shown a surge in popular support for new gun laws. The president has long said he seeks a comprehensive strategy for preventing future mass shootings while diminishing the death toll from smaller-scale daily killings, officials said. Some of what he unveiled would require congressional action, like the assault weapons ban. Some could be achieved with merely a presidential signature—a step that could, in some cases, inflame opposition in Congress, notably among House Republicans. (Some of those are decidedly small-scale, however: One of the 23 "executive actions" trumpeted by the White House was that Obama will "clarify" that Obamacare "does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.") The proposals were the fruit of extensive discussions, led by Biden, with victims' groups, organizations that represent gun owners, elected officials and law-enforcement leaders. Obama wants to boost anti-bullying campaigns in schools, and training for educators. He also wants to give schools the ability to use some federal funds to improve safety—but did not explicitly echo the NRA’s demand for armed guards in schools. Key steps also included imposing background checks on all gun purchases. Right now, an estimated 40 percent fall outside existing law, including those at gun shows and other 'private' sales, according to gun-control advocates. The existing system has stopped an estimated 1.5 million improper gun sales, according to an Obama aide, but "there's still too many loopholes." The president directed Attorney General Eric Holder to take a "fresh look" into whether the categories of people prohibited from buying firearms needs to be expanded or updated. Obama also aimed to thaw what the White House called a "freeze" in scientific research of gun violence by the Centers for Disease Control. And he urged Congress to bankroll the CDC to do research into possible linkages between violent video games and other media images and real-life violence, to the tune of $10 million. Below is a White House-provided fact sheet listing his "executive actions." Gun Violence Reduction Executive Actions Today, the President announced that he and the administration will: Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission). Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement. Nominate an ATF director. Provide law enforcement, first responders and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations. Launch a national dialogue led by [Human Services Secretary Kathleen] Sebelius and [Education Secretary [Arne] Duncan on mental health. . Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 12:17:41 pm ^^
The highlighted and enlargened above is what caught my eye - not only Obamacare is part of this agenda, but "houses of worship"(ie-churches) looks like will be playing a role in this as well. Looks like Caesar will finally be coming back to collect his chips, and no coincidence that the IRS-runned Obamacare has come into play. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 12:35:53 pm http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dhs-expand-and-formalize-coordination-gun-control-efforts_696127.html
DHS to 'Expand and Formalize Coordination' on Gun Control Efforts Janet Napolitano, head of the Department of Homeland Security, released a statement Wednesday saying she is "proud to support" the Obama administration's efforts to "combat gun violence in our country." Here's more from Napolitano's statement: In the aftermath of the tragic Newtown shooting, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), together with the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the FBI have worked to identify measures that could be taken to reduce the risk of mass casualty shootings. In the coming days, DHS will expand and formalize coordination of ongoing efforts intended to prevent future mass casualty shootings, improve preparedness, and to strengthen security and resilience in schools and other potential targets. DHS will work with partners at all levels of government, to address five critical areas intended to reduce the risk of mass casualty shootings in the United States: Prevention, Protection, Response, Education, and Research/Evaluation. DHS will also work with law enforcement to refresh, expand and prioritize the implementation of nationwide public awareness efforts such as the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign. This is a critical issue that requires immediate attention and I look forward to supporting the President and this Administration as we move ahead. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 01:34:55 pm Massachusetts governor proposes new gun laws after Newtown
1/16/13 BOSTON (Reuters) - Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick introduced a new series of gun laws on Wednesday that would tighten rules on sales of weapons and ammunition, in the wake of last month's deadly school shooting in neighboring Connecticut. Patrick made the announcement a day after New York state adopted one of the toughest gun-control laws in the United States and as President Barack Obama unveils proposals expected to include a new national assault-weapons ban and strengthened background checks on prospective gun buyers. "In the wake of too many tragedies, I have filed legislation to tackle the problem of gun violence and illegal firearm possession," Patrick, a Democrat, said in a statement. He also proposed an increase in funding to the state's mental health programs aimed at reducing violence. more: http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-governor-makes-pitch-stricter-gun-laws-164401646--finance.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 03:59:06 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/newtown-school-superintendent-rejects-nra-proposal-arm-teachers-213455773--politics.html
1/16/13 Newtown school superintendent rejects NRA proposal to arm teachers Newtown, Conn., Superindent of Schools Janet Robinson on Wednesday blasted critics who suggested armed teachers would have stopped the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Robinson, speaking on Capitol Hill during a House hearing on gun violence, said she felt remarks made in the wake of the shooting suggesting that Principal Dawn Hochsprung could have killed the shooter had she been armed were "insensitive." Robinson said, "She wasn’t at her desk and no good principle is." Robinson flat-out rejected the NRA proposal to place armed guards in every classroom in America, noting that the weapon used in the Sandy Hook shooting was a semi-automatic. "They didn't have a chance," she said. And she added that she doesn't envision elementary school teachers "packing" weapons while they sit on the carpet with small children—children who she said could be at risk around inexperienced gun owners. Robinson called on Congress to help offer long-term support to her community. "Mental health is a big piece when you have lost your whole sense of safety," she said, noting that Newtown residents want concrete signs of safety including a visible police presence. The hearing, hosted by House Democrats, was designed to gather input on how to combat gun violence. Though Congress was out of session, the event drew more than 60 members from both parties to a standing-room-only venue that required an overflow room. Earlier on Tuesday, President Barack Obama, standing beside Vice President Joe Biden, had unveiled a sweeping plan to combat gun violence. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 09:45:34 pm Obama using gun issue to advance health law
1/16/13 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/16/obama-using-gun-issue-advance-health-law/ President Obama is using the national debate over gun violence to push for further action on his health care law, including insisting on the kind of mental health coverage states must provide under their Medicaid programs. Mr. Obama, unveiling his gun proposals Wednesday barely a month after the deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn., will make it clear that his health law, known as the Affordable Care Act, allows doctors to ask patients whether they have guns in their homes, and will tell them they are able to report any threats of violence they hear to police. The president also will lay out the mental health coverage that all insurers will be required to provide under his signature-achievement law. Those are some of the 23 executive actions Mr. Obama plans to take whether or not Congress acts on his broader recommendations, the White House said. Other moves including offering incentives for schools to hire police; finally naming a new director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); and requiring federal authorities to trace all guns recovered in their criminal investigations. Mr. Obama also will call on his secretaries of education and health and human services to hold a national dialogue on mental health. The entire list of the actions Mr. Obama is taking comprises: 1. Issue a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system 2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. 3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. 4. Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks. 5. Propose rule-making to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun. 6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers. 7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. 8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission). Story Continues → Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/16/obama-using-gun-issue-advance-health-law/#ixzz2ICWLqzOh Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 17, 2013, 03:13:36 am Yeah, they are using this to go after the mental health system in general. It's obvious what they are up to. Look for something to pass that says any person with mental health issues of any kind, no guns allowed.
I'm beside myself reading this stuff. It's hard to believe this guy has the nerve to do this. People of today obviously don't even know what tyranny is. They are clueless the water in the pot has already started boiling. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 17, 2013, 07:40:20 am Moderator's Note: This post is made by BornAgain2, and NOT Mark. Somehow, there was a glitch while BA2 and Mark were editing posts simultaneously in this same thread.
Quote Gov. Perry: Using Massacre of Children to Advance Agenda 'Disgusts Me'... http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/18060/ Well, you really disgust me Gov. Perry! 2 years ago, you hung out with a bunch of pseudo-christian heretics that are quietly pushing for a global government. You also have allowed Islam to be taught in TX public schools. To boot, you also have allowed Obamacare money to flow into the state once it was passed 3 years ago. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 09:43:13 am http://news.yahoo.com/nra-chief-says-group-accepts-background-checks-122514606--politics.html
1/16/13 NRA chief says group accepts background checks WASHINGTON (AP) — The head of the National Rifle Association says the organization has no problem with tighter background checks of gun purchasers. But association president David Keene also says too much emphasis has been placed on banning certain firearms. In an interview on "CBS This Morning" Thursday, Keene argues, quote, "The real question that needs to be addressed is not what we do about guns, but what we do to make our schools safer." The NRA has come under close scrutiny in the wake of Newtown, Conn., shootings that killed 20 children and six adults. Keene said officials should focus more attention on a "devastatingly broken mental health system in this country," if they genuinely want to end gun violence. He said the NRA has been "generally supportive" of stronger background checks. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 11:15:52 am http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.R.142:
H.R.142 -- Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013 (Introduced in House - IH) HR 142 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 142 To require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 3, 2013 Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013'. SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON PURCHASES OF AMMUNITION. (a) Licensing of Ammunition Dealers- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 923(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1), in the first sentence, by striking `, or importing or manufacturing' and inserting `or'. (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 921(a)(11)(A) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `or ammunition' after `firearms'. (b) Requirement for Face to Face Sales of and Licensing To Sell Ammunition- Section 922 of such title is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)(1)-- (A) by striking `for any person--' and all that follows through `(A) except' and inserting `(A) for any person except'; and (B) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following: `(B) for-- `(i) any person except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to-- `(I) sell ammunition, except that this subclause shall not apply to a sale of ammunition by a person to a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer; or `(II) engage in the business of importing or manufacturing ammunition, or in the course of such business, to ship, transport, or receive any ammunition; or `(ii) a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to transfer ammunition to a person unless the licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has verified the identity of the transferee by examining a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d) of this title) of the transferee containing a photograph of the transferee;'; and (2) in subsection (b)(5), by striking `or armor-piercing'. (c) Limit on Shipping and Transporting of Ammunition- Section 922(a)(2) of such title is amended-- (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting `, or to ship or transport any ammunition,' after `any firearm'; and (2) in subparagraph (B), by inserting `or ammunition' after `a firearm'. (d) Recordkeeping Regarding Ammunition- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 923(g) of such title is amended-- (A) in paragraph (1)(A)-- (i) in the first sentence, by inserting `or ammunition' after `other disposition of firearms'; and (ii) in the third sentence, by striking `, or any licensed importer or manufacturer of ammunition,' and inserting `, or any licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer of ammunition,'; and (B) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following: `(C) Each licensee shall prepare a report of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of, at one time or during any 5 consecutive business days, more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition to an unlicensed person. The report shall be prepared on a form specified by the Attorney General and forwarded to the office specified thereon and to the department of State police or State law enforcement agency of the State or local law enforcement agency of the local jurisdiction in which the sale or other disposition took place, not later than the close of business on the day that the multiple sale or other disposition occurs.'. (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 4182(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exemptions relating to firearms) is amended by inserting `and except as provided in paragraph (1)(A) and (3)(C) of section 923(g) of title 18, United States Code,' before `no person holding a Federal license'. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 11:30:02 am Well, gun background checks isn't good either...although the world coming together on the same page has been prophecized in the bible...
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Rev 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? Rev 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. http://news.yahoo.com/universal-background-checks-agreed-other-gun-control-orders-152300467.html 1/17/13 Universal Background Checks? Agreed, but Other Gun-Control Orders Get Mixed Reviews Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 11:58:24 am FYI, BEWARE of this guy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Stockman A Houston Chronicle article reminds that "Stockman’s two years in Congress were marked by weirdness, such as an article in Guns & Ammo magazine that appeared under his byline in which he suggested the then-new Clinton administration raided the Branch Davidian compound in Waco on April 19, 1993, to justify a ban on assault weapons.[citation needed] Stockman said, in reports from the Associated Press in May 1995, that he stood by his article, which was published after the bombing on April 19, 1995 of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.[citation needed] A couple of weeks after he defended the article, he told the Associated Press that he regretted writing it, mostly for its timing. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/16/rep-steve-stockman-tones-down-impeachment-threat-against-obama/ Rep. Steve Stockman backs off impeachment threat against Obama 1/16/13 Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) said Wednesday he did not think impeaching President Barack Obama would be necessary to protect the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. “Impeachment is not something to be taken lightly,” he said in a statement. “It is a grave and serious undertaking that should only be initiated in a sober and serious manner. It should be reserved only for most egregious of trespasses by the President.” “I would consider using Executive Orders to engage in attacks on a constitutionally-protected right and violating his sworn oath of office to be such a trespass. The President cannot issue executive orders depriving the people of full access to an enumerated constitutional right,” Stockman added. “I do not think it will come to that. The President is not an absolute ruler, and his actions and orders can be checked and balanced by the Congress and the courts –- if the Congress is willing.” Stockman, who began his first term in Congress this year, gained national attention after threatening to impeach the President if he used executive orders to enact new gun regulations. On Tuesday, Stockman said that Obama reminded him of Saddam Hussein. Obama announced his set of proposals to reduce gun violence on Wednesday. Obama called on Congress to renew the assault weapons ban, restrict the sale of high-capacity magazines and require universal background checks for all gun sales. He also issued 23 executive orders, including appointing a director to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Though Obama’s executive orders appear to all be within the president’s power, Stockman assured his constituents that his staff were reviewing them. He vowed to “fight back with peaceable legislative force” against any executive actions that were unconstitutional. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 12:37:06 pm Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Eph 6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Eph 6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; Eph 6:15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Eph 6:16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. Eph 6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: Eph 6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; Eph 6:19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel, Eph 6:20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 01:16:33 pm MA gun control bill pending
- Seven round mag limit – Magazines are now limited to seven rounds. Current 10 round mags are grandfathered. Owners of so-called “pre-ban” Mass mags (magazines with more than 10-rounds which were allowable under existing law) have one year to ditch them - One Gun A Month – Sales – Bay Staters may not purchase more than one firearm per month. To exceed that rate is a felony. (2.5 years in prison, $1000 fine) - One Gun a Month – Rental/Lease – Citizens may not rent or lease more than one firearm a month (2.5 years in prison $1000 fine) - Universal background checks – All firearms sales (including private sales) must be preceded by a NICS criminal background check - Gun show registration – Gun shows must report every seller at a show to the Department of Criminal Justice Services and pay a $500 fee to same - No Bail for Gun Offenders - If a gun is used in a violent crime the offender may be held without bail until trial - NERF-free schools - Airguns, BB guns, paintball guns, air rifles and yes NERF guns may not be possessed on school property ($500 and a year in jail) - “Rat Rule” – Any staff or administrators who fail to report a violation of the above law are criminals ($500 fine) Full text here: http://www.mass.gov/governor/legislationeexecorder/legislation/an-act-to-strengthen-and-enhance-firearms-laws.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 01:40:33 pm HR 226 Support Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.R.226 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/t2GPO/http:/www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr226ih/pdf/BILLS-113hr226ih.pdf Quote H.R.226 Latest Title: Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act Sponsor: Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] (introduced 1/14/2013) Cosponsors (1) Latest Major Action: 1/14/2013 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. H.R.226 -- Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act (Introduced in House - IH) HR 226 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 226 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 14, 2013 Ms. DELAURO (for herself and Mr. GRIJALVA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means A BILL To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act'. SEC. 2. ASSAULT WEAPON TURN-IN CREDIT. (a) In General- Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting before section 26 the following new section: `SEC. 25E. ASSAULT WEAPON TURN-IN CREDIT. `(a) Allowance of Credit- `(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of an individual who surrenders a specified assault weapon to the United States or a State or local government (or political subdivision thereof) as part of a Federal, State, or local public safety program to reduce the number of privately owned weapons, on the election of the taxpayer there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter an amount equal to $2,000. `(2) YEAR CREDIT ALLOWED- The amount of the credit under paragraph (1) shall be allowed 1/2 for the taxable year during which the assault weapon was so surrendered and 1/2 in the next taxable year. `(b) Special Rules- `(1) WEAPON MUST BE LAWFULLY POSSESSED- No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) with respect to any specified assault weapon not lawfully possessed by the taxpayer at the time the weapon is surrendered. `(2) SUBSTANTIATION REQUIREMENT- No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) for the surrender of any specified assault weapon unless the taxpayer substantiates the surrender by a contemporaneous written acknowledgment of the surrender by the Federal, State, or local governmental entity to which the weapon is surrendered. `(3) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT- The taxpayer may elect the application of this section with respect to only 1 weapon, and if such election is made for any taxable year, no deduction shall be allowed under any other provision of this chapter with respect to the surrender or contribution of the specified assault weapon. `© Assault Weapon- For purposes of this section-- `(1) IN GENERAL- The term `specified assault weapon' means any of the following: `(A) The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR, `(ii) AR-10, `(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR, `(iv) AR70, `(v) Calico Liberty, `(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, `(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, `(viii) Hi-Point Carbine, `(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1, `(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle, `(xi) M1 Carbine, `(xii) Saiga, `(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800, `(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine, `(xv) SLG 95, `(xvi) SLR 95 or 96, `(xvii) Steyr AUG, `(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14, `(xix) Tavor, `(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando, or `(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz). `(B) The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Calico M-110, `(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, `(iii) Olympic Arms OA, `(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, or `(v) Uzi. `© The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Armscor 30 BG, `(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12, `(iii) Striker 12, or `(iv) Streetsweeper. `(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock, `(ii) a threaded barrel, `(iii) a pistol grip, `(iv) a forward grip, or `(v) a barrel shroud. `(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. `(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has-- `(i) a second pistol grip, `(ii) a threaded barrel, `(iii) a barrel shroud, or `(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip. `(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock, `(ii) a pistol grip, `(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, or `(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. `(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder. `(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L). `(K) A conversion kit. `(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event. `(2) RELATED DEFINITIONS- `(A) BARREL SHROUD- The term `barrel shroud' means a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel, but does not include a slide that encloses the barrel, and does not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or substantially encircle the barrel. `(B) CONVERSION KIT- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person. `© DETACHABLE MAGAZINE- The term `detachable magazine' means an ammunition feeding device that can readily be inserted into a firearm. `(D) FIXED MAGAZINE- The term `fixed magazine' means an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm. `(E) FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK- The term `folding or telescoping stock' means a stock that folds, telescopes, or otherwise operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of a firearm. `(F) FORWARD GRIP- The term `forward grip' means a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip. `(G) PISTOL GRIP- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip. `(H) THREADED BARREL- The term `threaded barrel' means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(a)). `(d) Termination- This section shall not apply with respect to any weapon surrendered during a taxable year beginning more than 2 years after the date of the enactment of the Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act.'. (b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting before the item relating to section 26 the following new item: `Sec. 25E. Assault weapon turn-in credit.'. © Effective Date- The amendments made by this Act shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 05:23:33 pm Gun violence "research"? ::)
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-end-long-fight-over-gun-violence-research-201708897.html?_sr=1 1/17/13 Can Obama end the long fight over gun violence research? As part of his 23 executive actions addressing gun violence, President Barack Obama announced on Wednesday that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) must begin researching the causes of that violence. “We don't benefit from ignorance,” Obama said at the White House. “We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence.” The president also asked Congress to infuse the agency with an extra $10 million for this research, which will include studying whether violent video games and other media images have an effect on violence levels. For those who didn't tune in to the congressional battles of the '90s, this announcement might seem odd. Why doesn't the CDC, which is dedicated to helping Americans prevent disease and injury, already study the causes and effects of firearm-related violence? As with most highly charged political battles, it depends on which side you ask. The CDC used to conduct extensive research into gun violence, but comments by CDC officials about the dangers of guns sparked a backlash. In 1994, A CDC official who oversaw the section of the agency that researched gun violence told the Washington Post, "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. Now it is dirty, deadly and banned." Around the same time, a CDC-funded nonprofit published a pamphlet encouraging people concerned about gun violence to “organize a picket at gun manufacturing sites” and write to their local politicians about gun control. By 1996, outraged House Republicans had had enough: They led the effort to defund the part of the CDC that researched gun violence, and added a special rule preventing the agency from engaging in any activity that promoted gun control. After the defunding, the CDC's spending on gun research dropped from a few million dollars a year in the 1990s to zero dollars today, and a larger message was sent to agencies that wading into gun research or data collection could lead to trouble with Congress. Separate federal actions limited other agencies' ability to collect data on gun ownership. Over the years, pro-gun advocates and some social science researchers have contended that public health researchers who worked for or were funded by the CDC had a clear anti-gun agenda that led to sub-par and politically motivated research. That bias has not changed even though the CDC funding has dried up, they say. "The ideology of the medical/public health researchers has not changed, and the quality of their research has not improved," says Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University. Kleck contends that his research on gun ownership and violence, which is often cited by the pro-gun rights side, is ignored by public health gun researchers. In the public health research world, however, there's a near consensus that a gun lobby-backed campaign against the CDC has purposely suppressed research on the subject for political reasons, a setback that has left the field decades behind. Published academic research on firearm violence fell 60 percent between 1996 and 2010, according to a report by the pro-gun control group Mayors Against Illegal Guns. The CDC, the National Institutes of Health and the Justice Department's research arm all completely stopped or dramatically reduced their funding for gun-related research over the same period. Researchers, many of whom depend upon federal grants, moved to other topics or reduced their firearms-related output. "It's been very hard for people on soft money like myself to get funding for a lot of research," says David Hemenway, director of Harvard University's Injury Control Research Center. ("Soft money" means researchers are responsible for raising their own funds.) Larry Cohen, founder of the nonprofit Prevention Group and a leader in the movement to define violence as a preventable public health issue, says the defunding of the CDC had a "chilling impact" on research in the gun violence field. After the defunding, "for the most part the research went away, so it had its desired effect," he says. Questions including the safest way to store weapons in the home and whether firearm safety classes work have not been addressed, public health researchers say. "We're nearly 20 years behind in our ability to really ask these kinds of important questions," said Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. It's unclear how much of an effect the president's announcement will have on the field, however. A spokeswoman from the CDC said the agency will not begin doling out gun research funds until financial year 2014. Without the additional funds from Congress, it's unclear how much the CDC would be able to give out. If Congress complies with Obama's request to hand over $10 million for gun violence research, however, a bigger impact could be made. "It would be a very needed breath of fresh air for Congress to allow the CDC to study this issue," Cohen says. The move may also remove a climate of fear around the research, public health researchers hope. But those who pushed for the defunding in the 1990s worry the CDC could now push for more restrictions on guns through their research. "I'm concerned that if President Obama's recommendation to restore funding to the CDC is implemented that we are going to see once again the same thing that we saw back in the 1990s," says Dr. Tim Wheeler, a retired physician and the head of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership. "We're going to see a very powerful and very prominent federal agency using tax money to advocate for gun control and generating these pseudo-scientific studies to back it up." Many public health researchers do believe gun ownership can be a health hazard, especially when it comes to suicide. Cohen says he hopes the surgeon general will release a report on suicides and firearms. A National Academy of Sciences review of gun-related research in 2004 found that higher gun-ownership rates are associated with higher suicide rates. The report did not find evidence that right-to-carry laws lead to either an increase or decrease in violent crime. The report also noted that researchers are hog-tied by a lack of good data on firearms collected by the government, including data on gun ownership. Without this data, it's hard for researchers to make strides, even with federal funds. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2013, 06:55:35 pm Again, I'm not a fan of the NRA, but nonetheless wasn't Christie the same guy who took a stand against Planned Parenthood and gay marriage? Dunno, but he seems to have shown his true colors since Hurricane Sandy.
http://kplr11.com/2013/01/17/nj-gov-chris-christie-slams-nra/ 1/17/13 NJ Gov. Chris Christie Slams NRA 1/17/13 (KPLR) – New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a Potential 2016 Presidential Candidate slammed the NRA Thursday for the online ad the National Rifle Association posted, pointed out President Obama’s daughters have armed guards and you don’t campaign. Christie called the ads “reprehensible”, saying elected official’s kids should be off-limits. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 18, 2013, 02:04:41 am Of course he's going to say that seeing he's an official. Actually, he's reprehensible. It's hard to take somebody serious when they are morbidly obese. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 18, 2013, 12:55:57 pm (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5i1iMD1vSKu-U9stadCXQ2xH-lkPdzZoIvhpBDNNYGAm4uRRhGw)
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQf1aslSFkcrV0QW_XolW1pqOkENKl4SRm3ftBM6XBwIqKZzsdt) (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSA7wWLOZtKgEBJb-Fob47txCaqb9UeREXDiE1xFVbToreejD3RDQ) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 18, 2013, 04:48:06 pm Not that I'm trying to bring celebrities into the mix here, but Danny Glover can't be THIS dumb, right?
http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4582 Quote “I don’t know if you know the genesis of the right to bear arms,” he said. “The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect themselves from slave revolts, and from uprisings by Native Americans.” ??? (http://oi49.tinypic.com/1q39l4.jpg) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 18, 2013, 08:02:13 pm Looks like "Republicans" are slowly caving in...
http://cowboybyte.com/17474/gov-bobby-jindal-proposing-gun-safety-legislation-based-on-mental-health-issues/ 1/14/13 Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal Proposing “Gun Safety” Legislation Based On Mental Health Issues Gov. Bobby Jindal wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill in an effort to reduce gun-related deaths and injury. Jindal announced today that he will seek legislation to improve gun safety in Louisiana by enabling the state to report to the federally administered National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) database an individual’s eligibility to purchase firearms based on mental health records. “Too often, both in Louisiana and in states across the nation, the mentally ill are slipping through the cracks and getting lost in the system,” Jindal said in a news release. “In order to protect these individuals and the communities they reside in, it is imperative that we take proactive steps to prevent them from harming either themselves or others. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Governor Jindal, what about all of those psychomedic drugs that have been responsible for 90% of these shootings!! >:( More on Jindal http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,5000.0.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 19, 2013, 02:49:26 am Not that I'm trying to bring celebrities into the mix here, but Danny Glover can't be THIS dumb, right? http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4582 ??? (http://oi49.tinypic.com/1q39l4.jpg) Apparently he is that dumb, or that brainwashed. ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 19, 2013, 12:35:13 pm http://news.yahoo.com/pa-kindergartner-suspended-bubble-gun-remark-035057936.html
1/18/13 Pa. kindergartner suspended for bubble gun remark MOUNT CARMEL, Pa. (AP) — A 5-year-old Pennsylvania girl who told another girl she was going to shoot her with a pink toy gun that blows soapy bubbles has been suspended from kindergarten. Her family has hired an attorney to fight the punishment, which initially was 10 days but was reduced to two. Attorney Robin Ficker says Mount Carmel Area School District officials labeled the girl a "terrorist threat" for the bubble gun remark, made Jan. 10 as both girls waited for a school bus. Ficker says the girl didn't even have the bubble gun with her and has never fired a real gun. He says she's "the least terroristic person in Pennsylvania." School district solicitor Edward Greco tells pennlive.com (http://bit.ly/13Nu0QF ) officials are looking into the case. He said Friday school officials aren't at liberty to discuss disciplinary actions. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 02:05:37 am First Chris Christie, and now someone from the NRA's OWN TEAM! Surprise, surprise... :o
http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-nra-senior-lobbyist-says-attack-ad-ill-181051948.html Exclusive: NRA senior lobbyist says attack ad was "ill-advised" 1/25/13 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One of the National Rifle Association's senior lobbyists said an ad by the nation's leading gun-rights group after a school shooting in Connecticut that refers to President Barack Obama's children was "ill-advised." Jim Baker, head of the federal affairs division at the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, said he had made his views known to others at the powerful gun-rights organization. The ad, which cast Obama as hypocritical for having expressed skepticism about putting armed guards in schools, when "his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools," drew widespread criticism when it first became public on January 15. Nationwide outrage over the shooting of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14 moved gun violence and gun control to the center of the U.S. political debate. "I don't think it was particularly helpful, that ad," Baker told Reuters in a telephone interview. "I thought it ill-advised." "I think the ad could have made a good point, if it talked about the need for increased school security, without making the point using the president's children," he said. The NRA has advocated putting armed guards in schools Baker was the NRA's representative at a meeting with Vice President Joseph Biden on January 10 to discuss the administration's plans to reduce gun violence in the wake of the school shooting. He said he was not involved in creating the ad, and once it appeared, he had let others at the NRA know what he thought. "I got to say my piece," he said. Baker gave no details of the their response to him, but said, "Believe it or not, there are occasionally differences of opinion in this building." In the ad, a narrator asks, "Are the president's kids more important than yours?" Obama's daughters, 14-year-old Malia and 11-year-old Sasha, attend private school in Washington and receive Secret Service protection, as is routine for children of presidents. The White House has called the NRA ad "repugnant and cowardly," while New Jersey Governor Chris Christie said it was "reprehensible" and undermined the NRA's credibility by bringing the president's children into the debate. Christie is considered a possible Republican presidential contender in 2016. Susan Eisenhower, the daughter of the late President Dwight Eisenhower who had Secret Service protection as a child, wrote in the Washington Post that she was "disgusted" by the ad. The NRA's president, David Keene, objected to the White House criticism earlier this month, saying "We didn't name the president's daughters ... What we said is that these are people who think that their families deserve protection that yours don't." The president's critics also have noted that when Obama announced his plan to respond to the gun violence, he was flanked by four children. Obama proposed renewing a U.S. assault weapons ban, as well as banning high-capacity magazines and more stringent background checks for gun purchasers. (Reporting by Susan Cornwell; Editing by Marilyn W. Thompson and Jackie Frank) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 02:47:22 am Without a PC this week, really not much tv news other than that Notre Dame football player and his hoax online girlfriend scandal, and Lance Armstrong. However did manage to see this on CNN the other day.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/kathleen-turner-returns-to-washington-for-gun-control-march/article/2519593#.UQOXi7_hqxo Kathleen Turner returns to Washington for gun control march 1/24/13 Actress Kathleen Turner has been a friend to Planned Parenthood and People for the American Way for many years, but this weekend she's coming to town to support a new cause -- gun control. "It was very much [due to] Newtown," she told Yeas & Nays Thursday. "It's such a grass roots kind of response, it just came about from everyone's shock and horror at the murder of all those children," she continued. Turner explained that Arena Stage artistic director Molly Smith called her up to see if she would come and speak at Saturday's March on Washington for Gun Control, something that Smith helped organize. Turner, who spent two months working at Arena playing Molly Ivins in "Red Hot Patriot," said absolutely. "Obama said that he needs the will of the American people to make this sort of thing happen, so this is a response from the American people," Turner explained, adding that she is for limiting the magazine size of guns and tightening up background check loopholes, and would happily follow up with Congress. As for returning to the local stage, Turner also said that she's thinking of returning to D.C. in 2014. "Molly's asked me to come do 'Glass Menagerie' in 2014 and, you know, Amanda's a role that I probably should tackle so I said yeah, I would definitely consider that," Turner said, referring to the Tennessee Williams' four-character play. She did, after all, have a good time living in the District. "I had a great little apartment on Eight Street in between the Portrait Gallery and the Archives and all those really good restaurants over on Seventh Street," she added. The March on Washington for Gun Control will step off at 10 a.m. Saturday from the Capitol Reflecting Pool and travel to the Washington Monument. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 26, 2013, 06:57:22 am Gun Owners Refuse to Register Under New York Law:They’re saying, ‘F--- the governor! F--- Cuomo! We’re not going to register our guns,’ and I think they’re serious .People are going to resist,
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14322-gun-owners-refuse-to-register-under-new-york-law 'MENTAL HEALTH CHECK' http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/biden-mental-health-check-may-have-prevented-virginia-tech-shooting/ HOLDER MOVES ON GUNS... http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/pending-regs/279345-holder-begins-gun-control-push Communist Party USA cheers... http://www.infowars.com/communists-cheer-on-obamas-gun-grab/ Warning from David Mamet... http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/01/28/gun-laws-and-the-fools-of-chelm-by-david-mamet.html 'Godfather' Tells Big Banks To Stop Supporting Gun Makers... http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/01/25/emanuel-to-banks-stop-supporting-gun-makers/ Feinstein Gun Control Bill Would Exempt Government Officials... http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/feinstein-gun-control-bill-exempt-government-officials_697732.html Lacks Dem Votes to Pass... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-25/assault-weapons-ban-lacks-democratic-votes-to-pass-senate.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 26, 2013, 06:58:25 am Feinstein Permanent “Assault” Weapons Ban Planned for Over a Year Through the use of rigged and or biased polling data, the entire mainstream media, in conjunction with those in power who are pushing this public agenda of disarming the American people
http://theintelhub.com/2013/01/25/feinstein-permanent-assault-weapons-ban-planned-for-over-a-year/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 26, 2013, 12:38:42 pm What Happened to Our Country?
When people reminisce about what America used to be like, some act scornfully toward us. They say living in a Donna Reed world was great for a few, but that there were many suffering souls. The way our country is today makes some of us long for those days which seemed so innocent compared to the harsh, cruel, coarse, and sometimes murderous days we exist in today. Yet most would argue that there were still injustices when we were growing up fifty years ago. Black people who had been freed a century before were still not treated equally in most parts of the country. Many women were limited in their businesses, political, and professional opportunities. And if they did enter any of those careers, they were capped as to what they could achieve. Few would want a return to those aspects of days past. Yet they would seem almost welcome compared to the experiences we have had in Newtown, Aurora and Tucson. Even though now more than a month has passed, the pain of what happened in Sandy Hook Elementary school stills burns deeply in our hearts. There were some who started assigning blame for what happened within days which was clearly indecent during a national mourning period. Yes, we need to find paths to resolve the deep divisions that trouble this country. But will that really take us back to a simpler time? After all, the residents of Newtown likely lived there to avoid all this cultural degradation and live a “Leave It to Beaver” life where the biggest challenges were errant children chewing gum in class. A yearning exists for the days when children rode their bikes to schools, which were open with flowing green fields where they frolicked under minimal supervision. Now children are escorted by grownups to their schools, which are fenced in and then locked down. Remember even at Sandy Hook the school was locked down at 9:30 each morning, just as almost all elementary schools are today. What does it say to the children of our country that they have to be escorted everywhere they go? Are they left to think that wherever they go there are people in uniforms providing security and their parents are on a constant vigil watching them? What kind of country have we passed to them? That we cannot as the grownups in this society come to some agreement of how to resolve this only makes matters worse. With every single massacre, we instantaneously divide into two camps. There are those who immediately shriek that it was the gun at fault, completely ignoring the other societal factors that brought a deranged madman to execute an unfathomable act. Then there are those who argue that there exists nothing that we can do to keep the means of mass murder out of the hands of these freaks. Come on folks, we can do something about this, but the suggestion by Wayne LaPierre of the NRA to put armed guards on all campuses seems so distasteful. Already an estimated third of our children go to schools that have armed guards. We should not unreasonably restrict our Second Amendment rights because of these maniacs, but putting our kids on lock down would just make matters so much more obscene. We have not yet had a coherent conversation about how to move forward. The people who want more gun control lurch into nonsensical talk about bazookas or tanks with very little knowledge of guns or how they function. People like the editor of the Journal News (Westchester area of New York), who listed the names and addresses of local gun owners in the newspaper, display to what extent the left will go to restrict gun ownership. They are scary as their actions are reminiscent of command and control countries that totally restrict gun rights. Some people do not understand that there is a difference regarding gun owners. It is not like obtaining a driver’s license. That is a privilege. The right to own a gun is embedded in our Constitution. It is there for a reason. The unrepentant Caryn A. McBride, Editor of the Journal News which listed the home addresses of prison guards and district attorneys in her cause to restrict gun ownership, scares us and should scare you. It brings into question the rationale for a federal gun registry when ownership is a right not a privilege. Yet, there are things that are just not going right. We have lost sight of the faith, family, and community that built this country. Our government has become too big yet cannot even confront the truly mentally ill among us. As Charles Murray taught us in his most recent book, Coming Apart, even our rock solid middle-class communities are falling apart. The amount of children being raised without proper parenting is just appalling. And when people do get married, far too many are getting divorced for their own selfish reasons while thinking their children will be just fine. Boys need fathers and not just as appendages. Never being a fan of video games, we would just as soon trash them, but that would be a First Amendment problem. Yet, when politicians decry weapons, they should really assault the culture vultures who sell these games that desensitize young males. Our President booted this issue to be studied in his recent proposal. That means zero will happen on this aspect of the problem. Why do we have to hear this nonsense that only protects these products? Moral suasion still works as has been effective with cigarette smoking, so why can’t we do the same with these disgusting games? Why do parents acquiesce to allow the constant devolution of young male minds? You may wonder why so many people bemoan our current culture and hark back to happier times. Maybe it is not as bucolic as we paint it, but our children certainly lived a more innocent existence. What our goal should be is to bring all children to those wonderful times instead of bringing every child down to the lowest common denominator. The innocence of childhood can never be devalued. It can only be lost. Let’s not have the innocence of another group of youngsters lost like we have at Sandy Hook. Let’s show some leadership. http://townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2013/01/21/what-happened-to-our-country-n1491988/page/full/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 12:47:21 pm What Happened to Our Country? John 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 01:14:53 pm http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=837434
Vatican supports Obama on gun control Updated: 15:20, Sunday January 20, 2013 The Vatican has praised US President Barack Obama's proposals for curbing gun violence, saying they are a 'step in a right direction'. Vatican's chief spokesman the Rev Federico Lombardi, in an editorial on Saturday, said 47 religious leaders had appealed to members of the US Congress 'to limit firearms that are making society pay an unacceptable price in terms of massacres and senseless deaths'. 'I am with them,' Lombardi declared, lining up the Vatican's moral support in favour of firearm limits. 'The initiatives announced by the American administration for limiting and controlling the spread and use of weapons are certainly a step in the right direction.' Obama is trying to rally support for reinstating a ban on assault weapons and requiring background checks on all gun sales. He faces stiff opposition in the US Congress and from powerful gun lobbies. Considering that Americans possess 'about 300 million firearms,' Lombardi said, 'people cannot fool themselves that it is enough to limit the number and use (of guns) to impede in the future horrendous massacres like that of Newtown that shook the conscience of America and world, as well as that of children and adults'. He was referring to the Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school where 20 children and six adults were killed by a sole attacker last month. 'But it would be worse to be satisfied with words' of condemnation alone, Lombardi said. And while massacres are 'carried out by unbalanced or hate-driven persons, there is no doubt that they are carried out with firearms'. Lombardi renewed Vatican appeals for disarmament and encouragement for measures to fight 'the production, commerce and contraband of all types of arms,' an industry fuelled by 'enormous economic and power interests.' Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 01:22:40 pm http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-march-gun-control-washington-164306917.html
Thousands march for gun control in Washington 1/26/13 WASHINGTON (AP) — Thousands of people, many holding signs with names of gun violence victims and messages such as "Ban Assault Weapons Now," joined a rally for gun control on Saturday, marching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument. Participants were led by Mayor Vincent Gray and other officials Saturday morning, and the crowd stretched for about two blocks along Constitution Avenue. Police blocked off half the road. Participants held signs reading "Gun Control Now" and "Stop NRA," among other messages. Other signs were simple and white, with the names of victims of gun violence. About 100 residents were expected from Newtown, Conn., where a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six teachers at a school in December. The rally was organized in response to that shooting. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2013, 01:37:06 pm http://www.teapartytribune.com/2012/04/09/ag-beau-biden-mandates-that-sheriffs-no-longer-have-arrest-powers/
4/9/12 Delaware AG Beau BIDEN, Mandates That Sheriffs No Longer Have Arrest Powers “It is time for the sworn protectors of Liberty, the County Sheriffs, to walk tall and defend their citizens from all enemies of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.” http://bonfiresblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/sheriffs-bushwhacked/ ”We do have some sheriffs with the courage to tell the federal government to stay out of their counties and not enter unless they clear with the sheriff first. The sheriff is not a part of the federal judicial system. He holds executive powers.” By Pat Shannan Sheriff Jeff Christopher of Sussex County, Delaware, when he was elected to the office in 2010, thought he was handpicked by the people to represent them as the highest-ranking law officer in the county. Instead, he has found himself in the middle of a fight for the future of American law enforcement as a result of a nationwide effort to abolish the sheriff’s office altogether. It is one more example of federal and state governments ignoring the will of the people as well state laws. In the case of Delaware, the state’s own constitution stipulates that the office of the sheriff is a constitutionally created position just like the secretary of state and the attorney general. Delaware’s Constitution states: “The sheriffs shall be conservators of the peace within the counties . . . in which they reside.” This time it is Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, son of Vice President Joe Biden, sending out mandates to commissioners informing them that their sheriffs no longer have arrest powers. In an opinion released Feb. 24, State Solicitor L.W. Lewis said that neither the state nor the common law grants arrest powers to the county sheriffs. It would appear that Lewis is a little confused. The office of sheriff was created more than a century before the official founding of the United States. Delaware’s first sheriff took office in 1669. “Now my deputies and I have been relieved of all arrest powers and can’t even make a traffic stop,” he said. “Delaware has only three counties. . . The other two sheriffs . . . will not stand up with me” to prevent the elimination of county law enforcement, he said. Beau Biden’s questionable ruling against the longtime tradition of the sheriff being the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the county because of election by the people means the state’s usurpation of the office appears to be a forthcoming fact. County spokesman Chip Guy announced, “The opinion from the attorney general’s office reinforces what has long been the position of the county [that] Delaware sheriffs and their deputies do not have arrest powers and are not in the same vein as state police or municipal officers.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2013, 04:44:17 pm http://news.yahoo.com/could-gun-control-gay-marriage-194640088.html;_ylt=A2KJjb1uoAVR3GEALG7QtDMD
1/17/13 Could gun control be the new gay marriage? The public's views on gay marriage have moved decidedly to the left, spurred by demographic and generational changes in the electorate. But that same electorate has shifted to the right on gun control. Why the politics of the two issues are different, for now. Is gun control the new gay marriage? Or are the issues more like mirror images of one another? Both could be categorized as hot-button topics that for years generated more political activism on the right than on the left. Both have also seen a recent shift in public opinion that, in the case of gay marriage, is upending the politics surrounding the issue, and in the case of gun control, has the potential to do so. But there are big differences between the two, as well. Gun control has been around as an issue much longer than gay marriage, and public opinion on it has waxed and waned – with support often spiking after a high-profile shooting, only to fall again. Moreover, the long-term trend on gun control, unlike gay marriage, has been a rise in opposition. As recently as April, the Pew Research Center put out a report noting the divergent trends on the two issues, noting that "on gun control, Americans have become more conservative; on gay marriage, Americans have become more liberal." Still, gun-control proponents including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg have been arguing vociferously that the issue is not nearly the political loser that Democrats have for years assumed it to be. And the dramatic change that's been occurring when it comes to public opinion on gay marriage – pulling politicians along with it – offers an intriguing model as to where the politics surrounding the gun issue could potentially be headed. Let's look first at gay marriage. As recently as 2004, President George W. Bush's campaign was able to use it as a "wedge issue" to drive up turnout among conservatives, helping him win reelection. That year, the Pew Research Center found that 60 percent of Americans opposed gay marriage, while just 31 percent favored it. Four years later, in 2008, those numbers had shifted – though the majority was still in opposition, with 51 percent opposing, and 38 percent in favor. By 2012, however, it was a completely different story: In July, Pew found just 41 percent of Americans opposed gay marriage, while a plurality of 48 percent favored it. Some of that shift was driven by generational changes, since young people tend to be more broadly in favor of gay marriage (though support has gone up among all age groups). The bigger change, though, was demographic: The electorate has become more Democratic, more urban, more educated, less religious, and less white – and the politics surrounding many cultural issues like gay marriage have shifted accordingly. So might those same demographic changes portend a similar shift to the left in public opinion on guns? Well, in recent years, as previously noted, the trend has been in the opposite direction – with support for gun rights growing. In the wake of the Columbine High School shootings in 1999, Pew found that 65 percent of Americans said it was more important to control guns, while just 30 percent said it was more important to protect gun rights. By contrast, in the wake of last summer's movie-theater shooting in Aurora, Colo., just 47 percent said controlling guns should be the priority, compared with 46 percent preferring to protect gun rights. That shifted somewhat in the wake of Newtown. In a survey released this week, Pew found 51 percent saying it was more important to control gun ownership, while 45 percent were on the side of protecting gun rights. That puts support for gun control at its highest point in President Obama's tenure, yet still well below the levels of support found during the Clinton years. But it's also worth noting that the rise in opposition to gun control has come about almost entirely because of a shift among Republicans, who have become much more strongly in favor of gun rights in recent years, while views among Democrats have remained relatively stable. And in many cases, those who currently say they favor protecting gun rights actually do support certain gun-control measures, such as universal background checks (favored by 85 percent overall) and preventing people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns (80 percent support). Even more notable, 58 percent of Americans say they would favor a ban on semi-automatic weapons. Bottom line: It's too soon to tell where all this is heading. But while the overall trajectory of public opinion on gun control has not resembled the trajectory on gay marriage in recent years, it's also not crazy to think that it might start to, soon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The highlighted above is what caught my attention - a little leaven leaventh the whole lump...ultimately, either you support gun rights, or you don't, there's no ifs/ands/buts around it. If the government starts with universal background checks and preventing a class of people from getting them, then in the long run it will lead to a very dark path. Same with banning semi-automatic weapons - as far as I know, an aluminum baseball bat is worse than these "semi-automatic" weapons. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2013, 04:54:40 pm http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-quiet-force-gun-control-debate-does-want-184500482.html;_ylt=A2KJjb1uoAVR3GEAMG7QtDMD
1/16/13 Pentagon a quiet force in gun-control debate. What does it want? The Pentagon has already successfully taken on the NRA over a pro-gun congressional measure that it didn't like. Now some retired officials are speaking out in the gun-control debate. Even as President Obama announced sweeping gun-control initiatives Wednesday, one little-discussed contingent has been quietly influencing the debate behind the scenes: current and former US military commanders. US military officials have already been successful in reversing one initiative backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) on Capitol Hill, which they worried could have a dangerous impact on US troops. Now, some prominent retired military officials are backing the administration's calls for "responsible gun ownership," including limits on military-style assault weapons. Given their background, active and retired US military often have significant credibility in the gun-rights debate – both in Congress and among the general public. “I do think retired military officers have a bit more weight than, no offense, the stereotypical ‘knee-jerk New England liberals' do,” says retired Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, a psychiatrist and former mental health adviser to the Army surgeon general. “We’ve got credibility, we’ve worn the uniform, we’ve carried weapons. I like to go to the range and shoot – we’re not anti-weapon, per se.” Earlier this month, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who served as the commander of US forces in Afghanistan and before that as head of the elite Joint Special Operations Command, which oversees US Navy SEAL and Delta Force missions, said that there is no reason for most Americans to have military-grade weapons. “I spent a career carrying typically either a M16, and later a M4 carbine,” he told MSNBC. “And a M4 carbine fires a .223 caliber round – which is 5.56 millimeters – at about 3,000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed to do that. That’s what our soldiers ought to carry.” He added, “I personally don't think there's any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America. I believe that we've got to take a serious look – I understand everybody's desire to have whatever they want – but we have to protect our children and our police and we have to protect our population. And I think we have to take a very mature look at that." Military commanders have not been shy about taking on pro-gun laws that they see as detrimental to their troops. For more than a year, they pushed Congress to change the language of a measure that prevented commanders from talking to their troops about weapons that they might be keeping at home. These were conversations that commanders wanted to have as the suicide rate among US troops was rising amid a decade of war. More US troops now die as a result of suicide than in battle. “A majority of [suicides] have two things in common – alcohol and a gun,” said retired Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli last year, when he was the No. 2 officer in the US Army. “And when you have somebody that you in fact feel is high risk, I don’t believe it’s unreasonable to tell that individual that it would not be a good idea to have a weapon around the house.” In December, lawmakers voted to change the language to clearly allow commanders to talk with troops about firearms. Dr. Ritchie's research has led her to deeper questions about guns and troop safety. She says troops are often at risk of harming themselves and others because of the easy access they have to firearms, both on base and at gun stores off-base. As part of a team investigating military bases with escalating suicide rates, Ritchie found that one factor common to all these installations “is that they are in states with relatively permissive gun laws.” She advocates for more gun safety education for troops. “I talk about things that I think might work,” she says. “I know it’s obviously a very emotionally charged issue, so I don’t use the term ‘gun control’ but ‘responsible gun ownership.’ ” On Thursday, as President Obama was announcing new gun-control proposals – including a ban on assault weapons – Ritchie and McChrystal said that the conversation on weapons in America needs to continue. “I think it has gained a lot more traction now,” Ritchie says. “But there’s a lot further to go.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 08:52:33 pm http://news.yahoo.com/background-checks-peak-week-conn-shooting-215045463.html
1/28/13 Background checks peak in week after Conn shooting WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI said Monday it conducted more background checks for firearms sales and permits to carry guns the week following the Newtown, Conn., shooting massacre that it has in any other one-week period since 1998. The second highest week for background checks came earlier this month as President Barack Obama announced sweeping plans to curb gun violence. The FBI started keeping track of federally mandated background checks in 1998. The newly released FBI data confirms what many gun dealers around the country have said about sales going up after the deadly Connecticut shooting that left 27 dead, including 20 children, as gun enthusiasts braced for stricter controls. The number of background checks does not represent the number of firearms purchased, but gun manufacturers use these statistics to measure the health of the gun industry in the U.S. After the Dec. 14 shooting at a Newtown elementary school, the FBI conducted 953,613 background checks between Dec. 17 and Dec. 23. The highest number of background checks in a single day since 1998 was Dec. 21, just one week after a gunman shot and killed his mother at their Connecticut home using weapons his mother had legally purchased before he drove to the school and shot his way into the building. The second highest day for background checks was December 20. During the week that Obama announced his plans to curb gun violence, the FBI conducted 641,501 background checks. The 10th highest single day for background checks came Jan. 19, three days after Obama spoke about gun violence and new gun control measures. Obama has announced a $500 million plan to tighten federal gun laws, and he is urging Congress to pass new laws that would ban "military-style assault weapons." Nationally, there were nearly twice as many more background checks for firearms between November and December 2012 than during the same time period one year ago. Background checks typically spike during the holiday shopping season, and some of the increases in the most recent FBI numbers can be attributed to that. But the number of background checks also tends to increase after mass shootings, when gun enthusiasts fear restrictive measures are imminent. One gun store owner in Nashville, Tenn., said people in the business are calling this rush to buy guns after the Newton shooting a "banic," meaning people are panicked that Obama would ban guns. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 11:03:59 pm http://news.yahoo.com/police-push-background-checks-gun-purchases-023655912--politics.html
Police push for background checks on gun purchases 1/28/13 WASHINGTON (AP) — Law enforcement leaders who met with President Barack Obama Monday urged him to focus on strengthening gun purchase background checks and mental health systems, but did not unify behind his more controversial gun control efforts. The message from sheriffs and police chiefs gathered at the White House reflected the political reality in Congress that the assault weapons ban in particular is likely to have a hard time winning broad support. The president appeared to recognize the challenge of getting everything he wants from Congress as well, participants in the meeting said. "We're very supportive of the assault weapons ban," as police chiefs, said Montgomery County, Md., Police Chief J. Thomas Manger in an interview with The Associated Press. "But I think everybody understands that may be a real tough battle to win. And one of the things that the president did say is that we can't look at it like we have to get all of these things or we haven't won." Opinions over an assault weapons ban and limits on high capacity magazines — two measures the president supports — were divided in the room. While Manger said the police chiefs from the large cities support that kind of gun control, some of the elected sheriffs who were in the meeting may not. "I think what was made clear was that gun control in itself is not the salvation to this issue," said Sheriff Paul Fitzgerald of Story County, Iowa, one of 13 law enforcement leaders who met with the president, vice president and Cabinet members for more than an hour, seated around a conference table in the Roosevelt Room. Among the participants included three chiefs that responded to the worst shootings of 2012, including Aurora, Colo., where 12 were killed in July; Oak Creek, Wis., where six died in an assault on a Sikh temple, and Newtown, Conn., scene of the most recent mass tragedy that left 20 first-graders dead. The White House recognizes that police are a credible and important voice in the debate over guns that has developed following last month's elementary school shooting in Connecticut. Obama opened the meeting before media cameras and declared no group more important to listen to in the debate. "Hopefully if law enforcement officials who are dealing with this stuff every single day can come to some basic consensus in terms of steps that we need to take, Congress is going to be paying attention to them, and we'll be able to make progress," Obama said. Obama urged Congress to pass an assault weapons ban, limit high capacity magazines and require universal background checks for would-be gun owners in a brief statement to the reporters. But participants said after the media was escorted from the room, the focus was not on the assault weapons ban. "He did not ask us if we do or do not support an assault weapons ban," said Hennepin County, Minn., Sheriff Richard Stanek, president of the Major County Sheriffs' Association. "He did not ask us if we do or do not support high capacity magazines." "I told him very candidly that this isn't just about gun control alone," Stanek said. He said the bigger issue is that the Justice Department's system for background checks is incomplete since many states don't report mental health data or felony convictions. He mentioned how in his home state of Minnesota, a 14-year-old shot and killed his mother with a shot gun, but was later able legally to buy additional handguns and automatic weapons because the background check did not reveal his history. "There's example after example after example like that across the country," Stanek said. Fitzgerald said the mental health system needs to be better funded because jails across the country are becoming "dumping grounds for the mentally ill." "I was not the only sheriff that spoke up on that issue," Fitzgerald said. "To me, that is the No. 1 thing if we are going to impact that kind of violence that's happening in America." All the law enforcement participants interviewed said they appreciated the president's attention to the issue and found the meeting constructive. Manger said the president did a lot more listening than talking and heard about the need to fund more police officers to protect school safety and a proposal to restrict the sale of ammunition on the Internet besides the broad calls for stronger mental health and background check systems. Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, president of the Major Cities Chiefs Association, said he's never been more encouraged about the prospect of gun control legislation of some sort, even if the assault weapons ban his group supports is an uphill battle. "You're not going to get 100 percent of people to agree on anything as it relates to gun control, and we're no different, but a majority of people in the room recognize that something needs to be done," he said. "This was not just a passing thing as far as the president and vice president are concerned. This is something that they are determined to keep in front of the American people until they get something passed." While the assault weapons ban was not a major focus of the White House meeting, participants say it was discussed at length at a later meeting with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who sponsored a ban in 1994 that lasted for a decade and last week introduced a renewal of the ban in Congress. "I would say her message was not well received overall by the group," Stanek said. "Everyone has an opinion on it one way or another." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 11:08:01 pm Mat_12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 29, 2013, 04:47:32 am See, here's the real problem with the way guns are being dealt with; government isn't giving the public the opportunity to vote on such things. They just meet amongst themselves, write up a bill, and vote on it. No public involvement at all, and that to me is unconstitutional itself.
Seriously, since when did the public tell their representatives to ban anything? They haven't. In fact, the public opinion is just the opposite of what government says. I'm not sure how else one defines government tyranny! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 02, 2013, 05:55:04 am Armed Guard Stops School Shooter Who Shot Classmates...
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/55742445-68/shooting-atlanta-police-says.html.csp Metal detectors fail to stop shooter... http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2013/02/01/metal-detectors-at-georgia-school-where-student-shot/ Newtown Calls for Armed School Officers... http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Newtown-Votes-for-Armed-School-Officers-189320221.html?dr Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 03, 2013, 05:33:07 pm I just want to say that the exploitation of those Sandy Hook kids s reaching just epic levels of disgusting. Really? at the Super Bowl? wow!
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 04, 2013, 03:03:06 am Yeah, saw that, and had the same thought, shameful. Exploiting dead children to further corrupt political causes. THAT is the style of the US government these days. No morals, just an attitude that they will take advantage of whatever opportunity exists.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 06, 2013, 04:36:02 pm I just want to say that the exploitation of those Sandy Hook kids s reaching just epic levels of disgusting. Really? at the Super Bowl? wow! Yeah, saw that too - as much as I like watching the football games, that part before the game(and during the pre-game show) really disgusted me as well. It's as if you saw subliminal gun control messages as well(ie-James Brown from the CBS crew talked about trying to curb gun violence as well - shouldn't his job be to discuss the games, and nothing else?). And speaking of that "power outage" after halftime, it likely had nothing to do to help the 49ers get back in the game - it was probably another attempt to condition the public for an imminent EMP attack. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 07, 2013, 10:30:32 am Friday, February 1, 2013
GOVERNMENT GUN GRAB http://srcwm.webcastcenter.com/src/src_020113.wma Hosts: Noah Hutchings, Larry Spargimino, and Bob Glaze Guest: Larry Pratt The president and his allies are attacking the Second Amendment and our rights to have guns as never before. Larry Pratt from Gun Owners of America talks about our rights as Americans and why the freedom to bear arms is essential to keep America free. Bible in the News: Planned Parenthood Sets Abortion Record Monday, February 4, 2013 GOD, GUNS, AND LIBERTY, Part 1 http://srcwm.webcastcenter.com/src/src_020413.wma Host: Larry Spargimino Guest: Michael Hoggard Many law-abiding Americans are fearful that the president will find some way to seize their guns. Michael Hoggard explains the history of our gun rights and why it is so important to defend them. Bible in the News: TBA Tuesday, February 5, 2013 GOD, GUNS, AND LIBERTY, Part 2 http://srcwm.webcastcenter.com/src/src_020513.wma Host: Larry Spargimino Guest: Michael Hoggard Many law-abiding Americans are fearful that the president will find some way to seize their guns. Michael Hoggard explains the history of our gun rights and why it is so important to defend them. Bible in the News: TBA Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 07, 2013, 04:25:27 pm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/sylvester-stallone-gun-control_n_2602644.html
2/1/13 Sylvester Stallone Supports Gun Control: 'Bullet To The Head' Star Doesn't See Value In Assault Weapons BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — Sylvester Stallone says that despite his "Rambo" image and new shoot-em-up film "Bullet to the Head," he's in favor of new national gun control legislation. Stallone supported the 1994 "Brady bill" that included a now-expired ban on assault weapons, and hopes that ban can be reinstated. "I know people get (upset) and go, `They're going to take away the assault weapon.' Who ... needs an assault weapon? Like really, unless you're carrying out an assault. ... You can't hunt with it. ... Who's going to attack your house, a (expletive) army?" The 66-year-old actor, writer and director said he also hopes for an additional focus on mental health to prevent future mass shootings. "It's unbelievably horrible, what's happened. I think the biggest problem, seriously, is not so much guns. It's that every one of these people that have done these things in the past 30 years are friggin' crazy. Really crazy! And that's where we've dropped the ball: mental health," he said. "That to me is our biggest problem in the future, is insanity coupled with isolation." Stallone is now in production on his next project, pairing up with the former "Raging Bull" Robert De Niro for "Grudge Match," about two aging boxers. "People think it's going to be some geezer brawl. Really? OK, they're in for a surprise. I'm telling you. I've been working on the fight, the choreography. He's taking it deadly serious. Because no one wants to be shown up," Stallone said of De Niro. "It's going to be like a `Rocky' fight. This will be `Rocky 7,' with me fighting – with Rocky fighting the `Raging Bull.'" Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 07, 2013, 08:53:59 pm http://news.yahoo.com/calif-seeks-adopt-nations-toughest-gun-laws-220030130.html
2/7/13 Calif. seeks to adopt nation's toughest gun laws SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Weeks after New York enacted the nation's toughest gun laws, California lawmakers said Thursday they want their state to do even more in response to recent mass shootings, particularly the Connecticut school massacre. Democrats who control the state Legislature revealed 10 proposals that they said would make California the most restrictive state for possessing firearms. They were joined at a Capitol news conference by San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, along with several police chiefs. "California has always been a leader on the issue of gun safety," Villaraigosa said. "New York has stepped up and stepped forward. California needs to answer the call." Among the measures is one that would outlaw the future sale of semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. The restriction would prevent quick reloading by requiring bullets to be loaded one at a time. Lawmakers also want to make some prohibitions apply to current gun owners, not just to people who buy weapons in the future. Like New York, California also would require background checks for buying ammunition and would add to the list of prohibited weapons. Those buying ammunition would have to pay a fee and undergo an initial background check by the state Department of Justice, similar to what is required now before buyers can purchase a weapon. Subsequent background checks would be done instantly by an ammunition seller checking the Justice Department's records. The legislation also would ban possession of magazines holding more than 10 bullets, even by those who now own them legally. All weapons would have to be registered. Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, promised that gun proponents will fight the measures in court if they become law. "It strikes me as if these folks are playing some sort of game of one-upsmanship with New York at the expense of law-abiding citizens, and that's just unconscionable," he said about lawmakers. Three bills have been introduced, with others to come before this month's deadline for submitting legislation. The measures are the most stringent to date among numerous proposals introduced this year to strengthen California's firearm regulations. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said he is confident Democrats can use their majorities in the Assembly and Senate to send the measures to Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown this year. Brown has declined to comment on weapons legislation before it reaches him. Steinberg said the measures are designed to close numerous loopholes that gun manufacturers have exploited to get around California's existing restrictions. Those measures had been the strongest in the nation until Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed New York's new law last month. Other proposed measures in California would ban so-called "bullet buttons" that can be used to quickly detach and reload magazines in semi-automatic rifles, and update the legal definition of shotguns to prohibit a new version that can rapidly fire shotgun shells and .45-caliber ammunition. The state also would restrict the lending of guns to keep weapons from felons, mentally ill people and others who are prohibited from ownership. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 08, 2013, 12:21:12 pm http://news.yahoo.com/senators-seek-deal-gun-sale-background-checks-083943375--politics.html
2/8/13 Senators seek deal on gun-sale background checks WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan quartet of senators, including two National Rifle Association members and two with "F'' ratings from the potent firearms lobby, are quietly trying to find a compromise on expanding the requirement for gun-sale background checks. A deal, given a good chance by several participants and lobbyists, could add formidable political momentum to one of the key elements of President Barack Obama's gun control plan. Currently, background checks are required only for sales by the nation's 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, but not for gun show, person-to-person sales or other private transactions. The senators' talks have included discussions about ways to encourage states to make more mental health records available to the national system and the types of transactions that might be exempted from background checks, such as sales among relatives or to those who have permits to carry concealed weapons, said people who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to describe the negotiations publicly. The private discussions involve liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is the No. 3 Senate Democratic leader; West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, an NRA member and one of the chamber's more moderate Democrats; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., another NRA member and one of the more conservative lawmakers in Congress; and moderate GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 08, 2013, 02:00:00 pm Quote Currently, background checks are required only for sales by the nation's 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, but not for gun show, person-to-person sales or other private transactions. And that shows you where the real problem is; at the federal level. Again, the federal government is trying to infringe on the rights of the states, wanting to impose on them requirements that violate the Constitution. And the only way to stop it is for the state's representatives to stop doing the bidding of the federal level, and return to doing as their constituents tell them. The House and Senate would need to basically clean house of a bunch of laws, unraveling decades of unconstitutional legislation, and disband multiple "federal agencies" such as the Department of Education, that are nothing but redundant, invasive, over budget, unaffordable, and in many cases, unconstitutional. Ultimately, we know what the federal motivation is, and that nothing will change it but Jesus in the end. Until then, I suspect the governments of the world will continue to encroach more and more on citizen's rights, and moving from legislative options to mandates. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 11, 2013, 06:53:17 am Surprise investigations aimed at homeschoolers
Connecticut cites need for 'confidential behavioral health assessment' In what critics are seeing as an ultimate power grab, state officials in Connecticut are pushing forward a bill to require state investigations of children like never before – calling for a “confidential behavioral health assessment” of every public school student in grades 6, 8, 10 and 12, and every homeschool student at ages 12, 14 and 17. The proposed Bill 374 is being described as the ultimate home invasion. “It’s outrageous that state officials could come into private homes and potentially remove children if they are assessed as a threat as a result of the investigation,” Home School Legal Defense Association Senior Counsel Dee Black told WND in an interview. “Regardless of what state officials claim, I don’t believe the results [of the investigations] will be held confidential.” Black, who provides legal assistance and advice for HSLDA members in what is ironically nicknamed the “Constitution State,” sees this proposed measure as anything but constitutional. And when asked if the psychological tests given by the social services hands the state too much unchecked power – enabling government officials to seize and tag children as mentally unfit or maladjusted – Black answered definitively. “No question about it,” asserted the Memphis State University School of Law graduate. “I don’t think people who live in a free society should be forced to give into mental evaluations of their children.” He contends such intrusions are both unwarranted and unconscionable. “Proposed Bill 374 would essentially authorize the state to conduct regular social services investigations of homeschooling families without any basis to do so,” asserts Black, who earned a Master of Laws degree at Georgetown University Law Center. “This outrageous legislative proposal must be stopped in its tracks before it gains any momentum.” The key motivation behind such a bill including homeschoolers? “The alleged [Sandy Hook] shooter was allegedly homeschooled for a while, but I’m not sure if it could have anything to do with it,” said Black, who has educated all four of his children at home with his wife. “The bill only covers homeschool and public school students – not conventional private school students. The heightened sensitivity in Connecticut about safety in schools could certainly be a factor [behind the bill] … trying to identify threats before they become a tragedy.” And just what takes place during these in investigations? “According to the Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership, a state organization made up of the Department of Children and Families, Department of Social Services, Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, and others, a behavioral health assessment is quite comprehensive and invasive,” reports Black, who’s been practicing law for 36 years. “It includes ‘a review of physical and mental health, intelligence, school performance, employment, level of function in different domains including family situation, and behavior in the community.’” Putting things into perspective, Black warns that parents could see social services following their children around their neighborhoods, observing them interacting at home with their families, showing up at their work, inspecting their classroom performance, administering IQ tests, psychologically analyzing them and physically examining their bodies. When would students be subjected to all of this? “Proposed Bill 374, filed in the Connecticut General Assembly, would require all homeschooled children ages 12, 14, and 17 to undergo a behavioral health assessment,” said Black, who has served with HSLDA as senior counsel for nearly two decades. “These assessments would be conducted by an unspecified health care provider and would be conducted even though there was no indication whatsoever that these children had a behavioral problem.” And Black warns that the results might not be as private as the state claims. “The bill states that the results of the assessments are to be disclosed only to the child’s parent or guardian, but that the health care provider must submit a form to the State Board of Education verifying that the child has received the assessment,” he said. He urges homeschoolers and any Americans concerned about the violation of children’s constitutional rights to act now. “Immediately contact members of the committee and express … opposition to this unwarranted invasion of family privacy,” Black said. “This legislation is sponsored by Sen. Toni Nathaniel Harp (10th Dist.) and Rep. Toni E. Walker (93rd Dist.), [and] the bill is presently in the Public Health Committee.” Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/surprise-investigations-aimed-at-homeschoolers/#8BibHtr1Jt4tQHSl.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 11, 2013, 03:45:17 pm http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/11/16926184-gabby-giffords-stars-in-new-gun-control-tv-ad
2/11/13 Gabby Giffords stars in new gun-control TV ad Americans for Responsible Solutions, the organization founded by former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) and her husband Mark Kelly, has released a new TV ad in the campaign to curb gun violence. "We have a problem -- where we shop, where we pray, where our children go to school," Giffords says in the ad. "But there are solutions we can agree on, even gun owners like us. Take it from me: Congress must act. Let's get this done." Video link inside The ad -- at a six-figure buy -- will air this week in DC, as well in the cities represented by congressional leaders: San Francisco (Nancy Pelosi); Cincinnati, OH (John Boehner); Louisville, KY (Mitch McConnell); and Las Vegas, NV (Harry Reid). And it comes after Giffords and her husband recently sat down with the New York Times for an interview. "Ms. Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Arizona, a gun owner, an astronaut’s wife, a shooting survivor and an incipient gun-control advocate, is settling into the third act of her public life. Her career as a lawmaker is behind her, but so is her role as the fragile, slightly mysterious victim in the months after she was shot point-blank in a parking lot here just over two years ago. Now, she is the face and emotional dynamism behind a new advocacy group and a separate political action committee, Americans for Responsible Solutions, dedicated to reducing gun violence. It is an effort, she said, that gives her 'purpose.'" Giffords and Kelly also will attend President Obama's State of the Union on Tuesday. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 12, 2013, 04:03:10 am Biden: We’re counting on ‘legitimate media’ for successful gun control effort
During a press conference on gun safety in Philadelphia, Vice President Joe Biden said that any reports that suggest that he was trying to take weapons away from gun owners was a “bunch of malarkey.” "I know that's a word that you've never heard before, although it's now in the dictionary," Biden boasted. Biden said that it was important for the media to dissuade the American public from the idea that the Obama administration was prepared to do something unconstitutional on guns. “To be very blunt with you, we’re counting on all of you, the legitimate news media to cover these discussions because the truth is that times have changed,” Biden added, warning that people would continue to “misrepresent” the White House's plans for gun control. "The social media that exists out there, the tragedies that have occurred, the Supreme Court decision affirming that its an individual right to bear arms - all give a lie to the argument that what we're trying to do is somehow unconstitutional, or somehow goes after the legitimate right to own and bear arms and to hunt and protect yourselves," Biden added. http://washingtonexaminer.com/biden-were-counting-on-legitimate-media-for-successful-gun-control-effort/article/2521184 Wow, he means he is expecting the media to support and change Americans minds, just like with their propaganda just as they have done with gay marriage and anything else that is left oriented, like global warming. ‘legitimate media’ that means anything that is MSM oh and fake news programs that stupid sheeple think is real, like the daily show. Is comedy not news!!! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 12, 2013, 04:52:50 am Quote “To be very blunt with you, we’re counting on all of you, the legitimate news media to cover these discussions because the truth is that times have changed,” Biden added, possible translation: "Listen up scum, you need to tow the socialist line we have implemented, and make sure you put out plenty of misinformation so the useless eaters get the idea guns are bad, and only criminals want to own guns, and seeing we have changed the way we do government in the US, the media is expected to play along with their comrade leaders." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 14, 2013, 01:15:56 pm Missouri Democrats Introduce Legislation to Confiscate Firearms – Gives Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Weapons
Missouri Democrats introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals. They will have 90 days to turn in their guns if the legislation is passed. Dana Loesch Radio reported on the new legislation being pushed by Missouri Democrats: Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution. Here’s part of the Democratic proposal in Missouri: 4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution: (1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri; (2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or (3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations. 5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/missouri-democrats-intruduce-legislation-to-confiscate-firearms-gives-gunowners-90-days-to-turn-in-guns/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 14, 2013, 11:36:32 pm http://news.yahoo.com/homeland-security-cache-bullets-190840538.html
Homeland Security and its cache of bullets 2/14/13 WASHINGTON (AP) — Online rumors about a big government munitions purchase are true, sort of. The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. It says it needs them — roughly the equivalent of five bullets for every person in the United States — for law enforcement agents in training and on duty. Published federal notices about the ammo buy have agitated conspiracy theorists since the fall. That's when conservative radio host Alex Jones spoke of an "arms race against the American people" and said the government was "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars." more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 15, 2013, 10:17:51 am http://www.thedailysheeple.com/senate-gun-grab-bill-could-be-more-disastrous-than-feinstein-bill_022013
Senate Gun Grab Bill Could Be More Disastrous Than Feinstein Bill 2/14/13 Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced S. 54 on January 22, 2013. The bill, titled Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013, is a cleverly disguised gun grab. How so? According to Gun Owners of America (GOA) the bill “could end gifts and raffles of firearms, and possibly ‘necessitate’ gun licensure across the country.” GOA’s Michael Hammond writes Quote At its core, Section 3 would send a person to prison for 20 years if you ATTEMPTED or PLANNED (“conspired”) to buy a firearm as a gift for another person or to conduct a raffle of a firearm, and negligently failed to note that the gift recipient or the winner of the raffle was, for instance, a veteran with PTSD who had been placed by the Department of Veteran Affairs onto the NICS list. Note that you don’t have to actually transfer the firearm to go to prison for 20 years, nor do you have to know that the proposed recipient is a prohibited person. It is enough that you acted negligently, that you planned to gift or raffle the firearm, and that you engaged in one “overt act” necessary for conspiracy to take effect (e.g., getting in your car to drive to the gun shop). In fact, the veteran or “prohibited person” doesn’t even have to be on the NICS list and doesn’t have to know they are a prohibited person. A marijuana smoker is a “user of … [a] controlled substance.” If you buy a gun with the intention of gifting or raffling to one of those, you can go to prison for 20 years, be subject to draconian forfeiture provisions (933(a)), be prosecuted and sued under RICO (933(c)), and be prosecuted for money laundering (933(d)). In other words, unless you’re “feeling lucky,” the bill would effectively outlaw gifting and raffling firearms. Finally, buying a gun for any other person — even though it’s perfectly legal for him to own a gun — is illegal under all circumstances except for a gift or a raffle. Hence, if a person buys an AR-15 in another state where he has a vacation home (under 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(3)) and leaves it with a friend in that state for safekeeping — 20 years. But there are other issues in the bill. For instance Section 5 could theoretically prohibit anyone in the country from owning a firearm without a license. Yes, it’s bizarre to say the least seeing that this would be state legislation that would cross state lines. The text of Section 5 reads, Quote Section 922(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended– (1) in paragraph (8), by striking `or’ at the end; (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end and inserting `;’; and (3) by striking the matter following paragraph (9) and inserting the following: `(10) is prohibited by State or local law from possessing, receiving, selling, shipping, transporting, transferring, or otherwise disposing of the firearm or ammunition; `(11) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm or ammunition to a person described in any of paragraphs (1) through (10); or `(12) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm or ammunition in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking offense or to export the firearm or ammunition in violation of law. This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector who pursuant to subsection (b) of section 925 is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925.’. So if you are a person who is prohibited by State or local law from possessing a firearm, according to the emphasized portion of the legislation, you are not banned by federal law and presumably it would be mandated that you were placed in the NICS system. I suppose the laughable part of the legislation is Section 7, which deals with someone who “smuggles or knowingly brings into the United States, a firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined under this title, or both.” I’m guessing this would apply to the Obama Justice Department, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Eric Holder and many subordinates, maybe even Barack Obama himself. Yeah, I’m not holding my breath on that one. GOA also pointed out, in an action alert, that “Gun Owners of America today submitted testimony at the request of the Ranking Member of the Senate Constitution Subcommittee. GOA took a strong stance against all the gun control legislation on the table and urged the Senate to put forth real solutions to school violence — like letting teachers and principals protect their students.” The pro-Second Amendment group also warns, Quote The Judiciary Committee bill will probably not contain the Feinstein semi-auto gun ban, and it may or may not have a magazine ban which would render most of the nation’s guns unusable, at least for the foreseeable future. But the Judiciary Committee bill will almost certainly ban all private sales of firearms — or any private exchange where the gun buyer does not first get permission from the FBI. And it’s this background check requirement that will inevitably set up a framework for a universal gun registry. The Leahy bill will most certainly have a “gun trafficking” section that is based on other legislation (S. 54) that he’s already introduced. This would turn everyone who lives under repressive state gun laws into a federal “prohibited person,” as well. Hence, if your state requires a license to possess a gun, you would also become a federal prohibited person. Oh, and the Leahy bill would also send you to prison for 20 years for unknowingly selling a firearm to a marijuana user. So, the next time you’re thinking of selling a gun, all we can say is: “Are you felling lucky?” Anyway, here’s Harry Reid’s strategy: He has at least eleven Democratic senators running for reelection in pro-gun states in 2014 — and they don’t want to SEEM anti-gun. The eleven Democratic senators in pro-gun states are: Mark Begich (Alaska), Mark Pryor (Arkansas), Mark Udall (Colorado), Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), Al Franken (Minnesota), Max Baucus (Montana), Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire), Tom Udall (New Mexico), Kay Hagan (North Carolina), Tim Johnson (South Dakota), and Mark Warner (Virginia). All of these Democrats will vote for the national gun registry and gun licensure. And, in exchange, Reid will allow them to vote against the Feinstein gun ban, which will be the sacrificial lamb to the more important gun control which Democrats really want. The solution to the wave of gun control legislation is simple. GOA concludes, “First, we cannot allow one word of gun control to move to the Senate floor; not one word.” “Second, the way we keep gun control from reaching the Senate floor is to defeat the “motion to proceed” to the Leahy Bill,” GOA adds. (The “motion to proceed” is usually offered by the Senate Majority Leader — in this case Harry Reid — to bring up a bill for consideration. The Senate quite often brings up legislation under a Unanimous Consent agreement, but if there is not unanimity, the “motion to proceed” can usually be debated, if not filibustered.) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 16, 2013, 04:00:35 am Quote All of these Democrats will vote for the national gun registry and gun licensure. And, in exchange, Reid will allow them to vote against the Feinstein gun ban, which will be the sacrificial lamb to the more important gun control which Democrats really want. Since when did a majority leader, or any politician, get the authority to tell fellow politicians how they are "allowed" to vote? See just how far we have drifted away from how the system is suppose to work? It's suppose to be what the citizens want of their representative, not determined by what one person wants. This country is so in trouble. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2013, 01:47:41 pm http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-lawmakers-move-forward-gun-control-measures-233724875.html
2/16/13 Colorado lawmakers move forward on new gun-control measures DENVER (Reuters) - The Democratic-controlled Colorado House of Representatives approved a package of strict gun-control measures late on Friday, in a state rocked by two of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. After a marathon session that stretched late into the evening, the state House voted to advance the proposals with little support from Republicans, but with a boost from Vice President Joe Biden, who called several wavering Democratic lawmakers and urged them to vote for the measures. The proposals passed on a voice vote, with a formal vote scheduled for Monday. The bills must also pass a final vote in the state Senate, also controlled by Democrats, before it heads to Governor John Hickenlooper's desk. Among the proposals are bills that would require background checks for all gun purchases - paid for by applicants - a ban on ammunition magazines with more than 15 rounds and a measure to allow colleges in the state to ban concealed weapons on campus. "We had a full and fair debate, which is exactly how the process is supposed to work," House Speaker Mark Ferrandino said in a statement. "Opinions were sharply divided, but we got our work done, and I thank members on both sides of the aisle." House Republican leader Mark Waller characterized the bills as a "knee-jerk reaction" to last year's massacre of school children in Connecticut and moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado. "They (Democrats) are passing these without any evidence that there will be any impact on public safety," Waller told Reuters on Saturday. Colorado has been shaken by two of the worst mass shootings in recent U.S. history. In 1999, two students at Columbine High School in Littleton shot dead a teacher and 12 students before turning their guns on themselves. Last July, a gunman opened fire inside an Aurora theater, killing 12, and wounding 58 others. The accused shooter, James Holmes, is awaiting trial on multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder. Emotions ran high during debate in Denver on Friday. Several Democrats said they had received death threats for supporting gun control bills, and a gun-rights lobbyist was escorted out of the Capitol after a Republican lawmaker complained she was told a gun-rights group would run ads against her if she supported any of the bills. And a Colorado-based manufacturer of ammunition magazines threatened to leave Colorado if a ban on high-capacity magazines becomes law, taking some 600 jobs with them. Democrats amended the magazine-limit bill to allow the company to continue to sell the magazines for out-of-state use, leading Waller to call the Democrats hypocritical. "Democrats stood in the well of the House and recounted all the mass shootings nationwide, then put in the amendment that says the company can sell magazines in every other state, including those that had tragic shootings," he said. Biden's call to lawmakers during the debate asking them "to stay the course" is evidence state Democrats are being pressured to advance the president's gun-control agenda, Waller said. Hickenlooper, a Democrat, said this week he supported the magazine limits and universal background check measures, but was undecided on the college campus ban. (Editing by Dan Whitcomb and Todd Eastham) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 18, 2013, 07:55:36 pm http://news.yahoo.com/colo-house-passes-gun-control-measures-211816177.html
2/18/13 Colo. House passes gun-control measures DENVER (AP) — Limits on the size of ammunition magazines and universal background checks passed the Colorado House on Monday, during a second day of emotional debates that has drawn attention from the White House as lawmakers try to address recent mass shootings. The bills were among four that the Democratic-controlled House passed amid strong resistance from Republicans, who were joined by a few Democrats to make some of the votes close. The proposed ammunition restrictions limit magazines to 15 rounds for firearms, and eight for shotguns. Three Democrats joined all Republicans voting no on the bill, but the proposal passed 34-31. "Enough is enough. I'm sick and tired of bloodshed," said Democratic Rep. Rhonda Fields, a sponsor of the bill and representative of the district where the shootings at an Aurora theater happened last summer. Fields' son was also fatally shot in 2005. Republicans argued that the proposals restrict Second Amendment rights and won't prevent mass shootings like the ones in Aurora and a Connecticut elementary school. "This bill will never keep evil people from doing evil things," said Republican Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg. The House also approved a bill requiring background checks on all gun purchases, including those between private sellers and firearms bought online. Other proposals would ban concealed firearms at colleges and stadiums, and another requires that gun purchasers pay for their own background checks. Democrats eked out the closest vote on the background check measure, which passed on a 33-32 vote. Democratic Rep. Ed Vigil, who represents rural southern Colorado, voted against the four bills, saying his decision was rooted in the state's rugged history. "This is part of our heritage. This is part of what it took to settle this land. I cannot turn my back on that," he said. But even though a few Democrats joined Republicans in voting no for the bills, the Democrats' 37-28 advantage in the House gave them enough leeway. The Senate still needs to consider the proposals. Democrats will need to be more unified in their support there because their advantage is only 20-15. That means Republicans need only three Democrats to join them to defeat the bills. House lawmakers began debating the bills Friday. Lawmakers debated for 12 hours before giving initial approval to the bills, setting up the final recorded votes Monday. During the debate Friday, Vice President Joe Biden called four Democrats, including two in moderate districts, to solidify support for the measures. Democratic Rep. Dominick Moreno, who represents a district in suburban Denver, was among the four lawmakers. He said Biden "emphasized the importance of Colorado's role in shaping national policy around this issue." Castle Rock Republican Rep. Carole Murray brought up Biden's calls during Monday's debate, saying she didn't appreciate "East-coast politicians" trying to influence Colorado legislators. Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper supports the expanded background checks, and thinks gun buyers should pay for them. He also said he may support limits on the size of magazines, if lawmakers agree to a number between 15 and 20. He said he hasn't decided whether to support banning concealed firearms on campuses and stadiums. Republicans say students should have the right to defend themselves. "Do not disarm our young adults in general and our young women in particular on our college campuses in the name of a gun-free zone," Republican Rep. Jim Wilson said. The gun debate highlights a fundamental philosophical difference between many Democrats and Republicans. "I resent the implication that unless we all arm ourselves we will not be adequately protected," said Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, the Democrats' leader in the House. Republican Rep. Christ Holbert became emotional while explaining his opposition to the bills. He said he understood Fields cares about the bills, because of her district and because her son was shot and killed in 2005. "But I care passionately about the United States Constitution and the constitution of this state, and the oath that we have taken," Holbert said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 19, 2013, 01:27:53 am Background checks on private sales ain't going to fly. That's about as unreasonable and unrealistic as it gets. No, it's downright stupid, not to mention an attempt by government to close the noose even further.
No law will ever stop people from doing evil things. Never has, never will. Seriously, consider that it is illegal to shoot somebody. And it's illegal to commit murder, but people still do it every day, even when there is a death penalty at risk. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 19, 2013, 04:55:18 pm http://news.msn.com/us/comcast-pulls-all-gun-ads-from-cable-network
Comcast pulls all gun ads from cable network 2/19/13 Gun shop owners are taking issue with the cable company's new policy banning firearms-related ads. Gun shop owners are miffed that Comcast has decided to stop accepting firearms-related ads on its nationwide cable television network. Tom Wright, owner of Williams Gun Sight in Davison, Mich., said he'll take his advertising business elsewhere. "I thought it was ridiculous; we are a legitimate business, we have been here for 80 years," he told ABC12. Wright said Comcast last week rejected his request through an ad agency to rerun a 30-second ad — a spot that it ran last fall — on local cable television. "Obviously, this is an attempt on the part of Comcast to help promote an anti-gun agenda," the gun accessories company said on its Facebook page. "Williams is encouraging all of our customers and friends to voice your concerns directly with your local Comcast provider and consider cancelling your subscription." Eric Elliott of VIP Marketing told The Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., that he wanted to buy local spots on the night of Feb. 12, coinciding with the presidential State of the Union address, to advertise "ladies night" at the ATP Gunshop and Range in Summerville, S.C. He said he was informed by Comcast that the ads would not be accepted due to the new policy. "Is it that they are trying to make a statement? If so, what is the statement? The most popular programs on these cable systems are shows with guns in them," Elliott told The Post and Courier. In a statement provided to MSN News on Tuesday, Comcast Spotlight, the advertising sales division of Comcast Cable, said: "Consistent with longstanding NBC policies, Comcast Spotlight has decided it will not accept new advertising for firearms or weapons moving forward. This policy aligns us with the guidelines in place at many media organizations." Comcast is the largest cable television company in the United States, with 22 million subscribers in 39 states. It recently announced that it would become the sole owner of NBC Universal, purchasing the 49 percent stake it doesn't already own from General Electric for $16.7 billion. Comcast declined further comment on the new ad policy. Comcast joins a list of media companies, including ESPN and Time Warner Cable, that have banned or restricted firearms-related commercials in the aftermath of the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in December. Twenty first-graders and six adults were killed by a 20-year-old gunman, Adam Lanza, who then committed suicide. Comcast's new ad policy also didn't sit well with gun-rights supporters, one of whom wrote on Williams Gun Sight's Facebook page: "Just called Comcast and cancelled. I am tired of my $$ going to support anti 2nd amendment corporations. I can't believe the way they talk out both sides by showing gun violence every single night but won't accept $$ from a legitimate, legal, honest business like Williams! ENOUGH! Time to take a stand!" Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 20, 2013, 02:29:37 am Comcast was just ranked as one of the most complained about companies for poor customer service. Typical.
More people need to stop using their service, and all cable companies, satellite too. What a rip off. We pay way too much for too little service. A bunch of junk channels they push on you in their "packages" that nobody would watch if they were individual channels and wouldn't make it on their own, plus they keep showing the same movies over, and over, and over, movies that have been shown on free network tv multiple times! And they expect people to keep paying for that stuff? Why pay an extra monthly fee for a movie channel that shows movies over and over again every month? It's stupid. And what really gets me is this new extra charge for "HD" service. Pay extra monthly for a signal that is already HD? Really? And to top that, DirecTV wants you to pay $99 upfront for a HD receiver, plus the extra $10/month just to get HD signal (and you must sign a 2 year contract like the cell companies do which I refuse to do). You no pay extra, you no get HD service on any channel. Now they are ripping people off on that, but if you get an HD antenna, you can get around 20 channels free, over the air, in true HD. Now how can the broadcast channels blast out HD signals for free, yet we have to pay DirecTV extra for a HD box, plus an extra fee each month? Theft is how. Personally, I'm setting up my living room tv (run through home theater) with internet service (browsing the internet on a 55" screen is awesome!), and got a HD antenna to check how the channels are locally, and I must say they are an awesome picture. Definite HD signals, for free. We recently got a new 55" HD LCD, and are seriously considering dropping DirecTV completely and just use internet, and free broadcast tv. We already pay $50/month for internet, so we aren't happy paying right at $70/month (no movie channels at all for that price!) for DirecTV for their next to basic service. Out of the channels we get in our package, we watch MAYBE 20 of the channels, and the ones we watch the most, maybe 10 channels. The rest are a waste of money, and I don't think most of those channels would make it if it were not for being part of a channel package where you must take the channel. Most cable channels wouldn't be around long at all if it were a la cart. Like so many things in this world, tv service is bad and getting worse. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 20, 2013, 03:41:55 am Gun-owner home searches 'Orwellian'
Democrats scramble to explain unconstitutional 'inspection' A provision in a Washington-state gun-control bill is so draconian that even its sponsors backtracked or denied any knowledge of it when they were confronted by a left-leaning local columnist. The “Orwellian” measure, reported Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat, would allow the county sheriff to inspect the homes of owners of so-called “assault weapons” to ensure they’re storing their weapons safely. A long-time Seattle radio talk-host, Dori Monson of KIRO, commented that whether the Democrat sponsors had no knowledge of the provision, as most claim, or whether they intentionally tried to pass it, Washington voters should be concerned. “Either way, we have put control of our state in the hands of some really dangerous people,” he said. While there is fierce debate over whether gun-control laws violate the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms, the bill’s home-inspection provision appears to be a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against warrantless searches. The bill’s chief aim is to ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons that use detachable ammunition magazines. It would prohibit clips that contain more than 10 rounds. The provision that has even lawmakers on the left concerned addresses the thousands of semi-automatic weapons already owned by state residents. Senate Bill 5737 states: “In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall … safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.” Failure to comply could result in a year in jail. Westneat cited the Seattle trial lawyer and self-described liberal who brought the bill to his attention. “They always say, we’ll never go house to house to take your guns away. But then you see this, and you have to wonder,” said Lance Palmer. Palmer noted he’s a liberal Democrat who voted for a Republican only once in his life. “But now I understand why my right-wing opponents worry about having to fight a government takeover,” he said. “It’s exactly this sort of thing that drives people into the arms of the NRA.” A sponsor of the bill, a Seattle Democrat, told Westneat he didn’t know the bill authorized police searches. “I made a mistake,” Adam Kline said. “I frankly should have vetted this more closely.” The prime sponsor, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, confessed it’s probably unconstitutional. “I have to admit that shouldn’t be in there,” Murray said. Murray explained to Westneat he came to realize an assault-weapons ban has little chance of passing this year, so he inserted the provision as “a general statement, as a guiding light of where we need to go.” Monson said one of his listeners received a reply from another sponsor, Democratic Sen. Jeannie Kohl-Welles, who called the provision “an error in the preparation of the bill.” She said that if she had known it was in the bill, she wouldn’t have signed on as a sponsor. “Of course I should have read the bill in its entirety prior to signing onto it; however, I received a briefing on it without mention of the warrantless search language,” the lawmaker said. New York was the first state to pass strict controls on guns after the Sandy Hook shooting, banning assault weapons and magazines. But as WND reported yesterday, Democratic lawmakers in gun-friendly Colorado, under pressure from the White House, have proposed a flurry of gun control bills, including one that would hold gun makers and owners responsible for any crimes committed by their weapons. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/gun-owner-home-searches-called-orwellian/#KVi4Ox1VRvUhOY7F.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 20, 2013, 01:50:45 pm Quote While there is fierce debate over whether gun-control laws violate the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms, the bill’s home-inspection provision appears to be a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against warrantless searches. The problem with this angle is that they already have provisions for such inspections when you get a FFL, and it is up to the sheriff to inspect how you store your weapons. That's for a federal firearms license, but that still doesn't make it legal under the Constitution. Not sure it's a 4th violation, seeing it's under the terms of standards, which I suspect would be their "probable cause". Now if there is not specific reasons for police entering the home, that's a different story. Is it a 2nd Amendment violation? Personally, I understand the Constitution to say any regulation or restrictions on what arms a person bears is a violation. Restrictions and regulations clearly ignores "shall not be infringed". Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 21, 2013, 12:28:11 pm It seems like the anti-gun lobby and the NWO-runned media will do everything they can to get their agendas through. This case has NOTHING to do with guns(or lack thereof). ZERO.
http://news.yahoo.com/pistorius-applied-licenses-6-more-guns-182418063--oly.html Pistorius applied for licenses for 6 more guns 2/21/13 JOHANNESBURG (AP) — Oscar Pistorius applied for firearm licenses for six more guns weeks before the shooting death of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp inside his house on Feb. 14, according to official records obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday. The applications were made on Jan. 22, just over three weeks before Pistorius shot his girlfriend dead in his home with a licensed 9 mm pistol. The athlete says the killing of Steenkamp was accidental as he thought she was a dangerous intruder inside his bathroom. Prosecutors say the double-amputee athlete intended to kill his girlfriend and have charged him with premediated murder. In details obtained from the South African Police Service's National Firearms Center and given over the telephone, Pistorius applied for licenses for a Smith & Wesson model 500 revolver, a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver, a Vector .223-caliber rifle and three shotguns: A Mossberg shotgun, a Maverick shotgun and a Winchester shotgun. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 21, 2013, 01:38:25 pm Police urge fighting back against 'active shooters'...
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/02/21/bay-area-law-enforcement-encourages-fighting-back-against-active-shooters/ Group to give away shotguns in high-crime areas... http://houston.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/houston-group-giving-away-shotguns-high-crime-neighborhoods-to-test-if-crime-is-reduced/ MA lawmaker cheered for withdrawing 'assault weapon' ban... http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/westford-selectman-proposes-ban-on-assault-weapons/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 22, 2013, 07:28:54 pm http://news.yahoo.com/gop-house-panel-chairman-consider-gun-bills-232642640--politics.html
2/22/13 GOP House panel chairman will consider gun bills WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said Friday that he's interested in writing legislation this year improving background checks for gun buyers and **** down on illegal firearms sales. In an interview, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., provided little detail about his plans. But he said the federal background check system should be fixed to make sure more people with serious mental illnesses don't get firearms. Criminals and people with significant mental problems are among those barred by federal law from buying guns. States are supposed to supply the federal background check system with purchasers' mental health records, but often they do not because of privacy rules and other barriers. "We want to improve that system to try to screen out people who should not be able to possess firearms," Goodlatte said. Until now, House GOP leaders have only said they will wait to act until the Democratic-run Senate produces legislation. The Senate Judiciary Committee, led by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., could begin writing its own gun curb measure in the next week or two. Goodlatte did not say when his panel might write legislation, but he said he would not necessarily wait for the Senate to pass legislation. President Barack Obama has proposed near-universal background checks. Currently, the checks are only required for purchases from federally licensed gun dealers, not sales between private individuals at gun shows, online or elsewhere. Goodlatte said his legislation would be unlikely to require private background checks for private gun sales between people. Obama also wants to ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Goodlatte said he opposes those ideas. Goodlatte did not say when his panel might write legislation. His comments that the House would begin acting on gun legislation were first reported by Roll Call, a newspaper that covers Congress. Details remain unclear about the mental health of Adam Lanza, who shot 26 people to death at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school in December. But shooters in some recent mass shootings have been afflicted with mental problems, including those involved in the Virginia Tech killings in 2007 and the 2011 Tucson attack that killed six people and wounded 13, including then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz. As other congressional Republicans have done, Goodlatte also complained that current gun laws are not being enforced sufficiently. He and other GOP members of the Judiciary Committee wrote letters Friday to Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, asking for data on federal firearms prosecutions for the past 11 years. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 23, 2013, 07:43:55 pm http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/16/ammunition-shortage/1919321/
2/18/13 Gun dealers report shortages of ammunition Retailers say much of the demand is from gun owners who are stockpiling in case certain weapons are banned. Gun shops are running low on ammunition from a run by customers fearful of potential gun-control legislation, according to gun retailers and customers. Prices have more than doubled over past year in some shops, retailers are putting limits on the amount a customer can buy, and some common types of ammunition, such as .22-caliber long rifle shells, are hard to get. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, which represents ammunition makers, retailers, hunters and sport shooters, attributes what it calls "spot shortages" around the country to rising popularity of sport-shooting and hunting, and to people who are "keeping firearms for personal and home defense." The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in December reported recently that hunting license sales were up 9% from 2006 to 2011, reversing a 25-year decline. Michael Hampton, Jr., executive director of the National Skeet Shooting Association and the National Sporting Clays Association, says participation in those sports, which includes up to 4 million participants in each sport, is growing 3-5% annually. But retailers say much of the demand is from gun owners who are stockpiling in case certain weapons are banned, who believe that economic chaos may be coming, or who are driven by rumors of inevitable background checks or rising taxes on ammunition. [size=14]Gun sellers and owners say a run on ammunition began shortly after President Obama was re-elected, and has intensified in the gun-violence debate since the December mass killing of 20 children and six adults at a school in Newtown, Conn[/size]. "We absolutely are in uncharted territory," said Larry Hyatt, of the family-owned Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C.. "Our store is 53 years old, and we have never seen anything like this. We have had some spot shortages and busy gun times in the past. This is a level (of demand) never before seen." He adds: "The political turmoil is intensifying it. People feel like this administration is very anti-gun, and they are going for the legal gun owner." Among the rumors he hears, he says, are that taxes on ammunition are going up and that background checks for ammunition purchases are coming. "Whether true or not, this information is out there, and people are getting it while they can," Hyatt says. He is limiting sales of .22-caliber to one box, and is running low on everything from holsters to cleaning brushes. Mike Wastler, manager of Bart's Sports World in Glen Burnie, Md., says he is also having trouble getting guns and ammunition from manufacturers who are "producing 24/7." He says that even before Obama's re-election there was rising demand from people worried about economic chaos. Sales "went crazy" after Obama proposed banning assault weapons, he says Wastler says certain types of .22 shells are "non-existent" in his store, and that others, like 9 mm, and .40 and .45 caliber are "very, very short." So are replacements parts for guns, he says. While there are proposals to ban assault weapons, outlaw certain types of armor-piercing bullets, restrict the number of rounds in magazines for some guns, and end online ammunition sales, Obama and leading anti-gun violence proponents on Capitol Hill have not proposed background checks for ammunition, or restricting the amount of sales. The White House would not comment on the ammunition shortage, but Obama has asserted he is not out to infringe on Second Amendment rights. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., has introduced legislation that would effectively ban online sales of ammunition, would require ammunition sellers to have a license, and to report to federal authorities the sale of more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition to a single person. But McCarthy also says on her web site that protecting the Second Amendment right to bear arms for legal gun owners is one of her top priorities. Her spokesman, Shams Tarek, says gun-rights advocates "are putting out this fear that people are trying to take away their guns, put really onerous restrictions on them, when that is not the case." The run on ammunition comes amid Internet discussion about recent purchases of ammunition by the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration. Homeland Security solicited bids for up to 1.1 billion rounds of ammunition for over the next five years, but agency spokesman Marsha Catron says purchases may not run that high, and that most of it would go to required training for about 130,000 armed federal agents in various agencies. The DHS ammunition purchases have been steady since 2009. Last year, after the Social Security Administration solicited bids for 174,000 rounds of .357 ammunition, the agency got so many questions from the public about why it needed that powerful of a bullet that its inspector general's office put out a statement explaining why. The Social Security Administration has 295 armed agents that protect offices around the country, and that ammunition is standard issue for the arms they carry on the job, the agency said. "Our special agents need to be armed and trained appropriately," read the Social Security statement. "They not only investigate allegations of Social Security fraud, but they also are called to respond to threats against Social Security offices, employees and customers." Bid winner for the Homeland Security ammunition was ATK Armament Systems, a division of Alliant Technosystems Inc., and a major supplier of guns and ammunition for the military. According to a IBISWorld, a market analyst, ATK Armament is expected to post a 10% increase in revenue, to $1.7 billion, in 2013. "While most Americans have cut back on their purchases of cars, clothing and other luxuries … gun enthusiasts are working themselves into a frenzy over what another four years under the Obama administration may hold for gun laws,'' IBISWorld reported in October. "As a result, they are purchasing firearms and ammunition at record rates.'' Greg Pacholczyk, who shoots everything from pistols to the AR-15 that the Obama administration wants to ban, says he is not in a frenzy, but that if he is in a store that carries ammunition, he looks to buy. The Marriottsville, Md., resident says AR-15 semi-automatic rifles are very hard to find for purchase, and that ammunition for it is hard to find, too. "Gun replacement parts — if you have to find something as simple as a firing pin for an AR-15," it is very difficult, he says. "You read on the blogs people are practically giving away their first born for a little piece of metal." Contributing: Kevin Johnson and Andria Yu Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 26, 2013, 06:13:46 pm Surprise, surprise! This piece of legislation is being spread out over FOUR bills!
http://news.yahoo.com/separating-gun-control-bills-democrats-reveal-strategy-233554019.html 2/26/13 In separating gun-control bills, Democrats reveal strategy WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's fellow Democrats in the Senate have spread his gun-control proposals across four bills in an effort to get at least some of the less controversial measures - such as expanded background checks for gun buyers - passed into law. The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote as early as Thursday on the bills, which together amount to an acknowledgement by Democrats that a ban on military-style "assault" weapons is unlikely to clear Congress. The proposed ban on assault weapons makes up one of the four gun-control bills, all of which are likely to be approved by the Democrat-led Judiciary Committee and be considered by the full Senate, congressional aides said Tuesday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, will decide how to package the measures for a vote on the Senate floor. By breaking Obama's gun-control agenda into pieces, supporters hope to avoid having a less popular proposal such as the assault weapons ban contribute to the rejection of other proposals, aides said. The proposed ban, introduced by Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, has drawn opposition from Republicans and some Democrats. It will be the focus of a Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday. "We are taking a pragmatic approach that is designed to maximize our options," a senior Democratic aide said. The four bills now before the Judiciary Committee include one introduced by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the panel's chairman, that would crack down on illegal gun trafficking. Another bill, by California Senator Barbara Boxer, is designed to increase school safety. A bill, still being finalized, would call for "universal" background checks for all prospective gun buyers. Currently, only about 40 percent of buyers are screened for previous crimes or mental illness. Feinstein's proposal, targets assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips like those used in the December 14 massacre at a school in Newtown, Connecticut, that left 20 children and six adults dead - and inspired the current action on gun control. 'NO WAY' ON ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN Wednesday's hearing is likely be the latest in a series of dramatic Capitol Hill hearings to reflect the passion surrounding the debate over gun control. Those scheduled to testify include the father of one of the students killed in Newtown, and a doctor who was in a local emergency room when victims of the shootings were brought in. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said Democrats "are trying to create political theater" with the hearing, and that there is no way an assault weapons ban will become law. "It faces bipartisan opposition," he said. Even so, all four of the gun-control bills are widely expected to sent to the full Senate on party-line votes of 10-8, Senate aides said. But to clear procedural roadblocks from Republicans on the Senate floor, the measures will need 60 votes in the 100-member Senate, where Democrats and independents who support them account for 55 seats and Republicans hold 45. There have been calls from those in both parties for expanded background checks in an effort to keep firearms out of the hands of convicted criminals and the mentally ill. But a bipartisan deal has not yet been struck despite weeks of talks among four senators - Democrats Charles Schumer of New York and Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republicans Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Mark Kirk of Illinois. "It is the one thing we think can really pass, and we don't yet have an agreement on it," a Senate aide said. On Tuesday, Coburn said, "We're still talking." (Editing by David Lindsey and Cynthia Osterman) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 27, 2013, 08:16:27 pm http://news.yahoo.com/rep-bob-goodlatte-government-not-enforcing-existing-us-213539962.html
2/27/13 Rep. Bob Goodlatte: Government is not enforcing existing US gun laws Two gun-control measures that could pass Congress include improving background check system and cracking down on illegal sales, says Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R) at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast on Wednesday. House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte heads the committee that oversees immigration reform and gun control, among other issues. The Virginia Republican was the guest at the Feb. 27 Monitor Breakfast. His approach to gun-control legislation: The panel will “be engaged in looking at ways to improve our efforts to keep weapons out of the hands of people who perpetrate tragedies.... The states are not doing the job they should in terms of getting data into [the background check] system.... The federal government is not doing the job they should be doing in enforcing our current gun laws.” more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 28, 2013, 02:34:52 am Quote Rep. Bob Goodlatte: Government is not enforcing existing US gun laws Nope, they aren't. Oh, notice how the whole Fast and Furious investigation dropped right off the media radar? We went from the government caught red-handed running guns to drug cartels, to the government basically threatening new gun laws for citizens. People cannot convince me that "Problem, Reaction, Solution" is not being implemented. They will receive their reward in due time! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 28, 2013, 05:15:35 pm Maryland Senate passes gun control bill
2/28/13 http://news.yahoo.com/maryland-senate-passes-gun-control-bill-204639781.html WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Maryland Senate approved a comprehensive gun control bill on Thursday that includes a ban on assault weapons and fingerprinting for prospective handgun buyers. The Democratic-controlled Senate passed the bill 28-19 and sent it on to the House of Delegates, according to the chamber's website. Democratic Governor Martin O'Malley proposed the measure in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut, school massacre in December in which 20 children and six adults died. The rampage reignited a national debate on gun control. The bill has a licensing requirement for handgun buyers to submit fingerprints to state police. Gun buyers also have to complete an eight-hour safety training course and undergo a more rigorous background check before purchasing a weapon. The measure bars anyone who has been involuntarily committed due to mental illness from possessing a firearm. It also bans assault weapons and limits magazine sizes. (Reporting by Ian Simpson; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Andre Grenon) . Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 28, 2013, 09:59:59 pm http://news.yahoo.com/ny-exempt-tv-movies-under-states-gun-law-000632467.html
2/28/13 NY to exempt TV, movies under state's new gun law ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — New York sought to combat violence by rushing the nation's toughest gun control measure into law after the Connecticut school shootings that killed 26 people, but the state is now carving out an exemption to make sure movie and TV producers can stage running gun battles on Manhattan streets. Movie and TV productions have long been courted by New York and other states with tax breaks in exchange for the jobs and glamour of the industry. Hollywood is also a major campaign fundraising stop for New York politicians. "We spend a lot of money in the state bringing movie production here, post-production here, so obviously we would want to facilitate that," said Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who wants to expand the film and TV tax credit. He said movies and TV may use fake guns that wouldn't be subject to the new law but the industry wants "certainty." The revised law would allow them to use real weapons without real ammunition. "There's no reason not to make a change like that to give an industry comfort, especially when it's an industry we want to do business in the state," the governor said. Film and television producers have spent more than $7 billion in New York since the state began offering tax breaks in 2004, the governor's office says. New York has been the stage for recent films including "Spider-Man 3," ''The Nanny Diaries," ''Sex and the City 2," and "The Sorcerer's Apprentice." Most of Woody Allen's films are made in New York City, and many TV shows including "Louie" turn to the city for their backdrop. The Hollywood exemption is just one of the revisions planned for the state law that was passed in January before the Obama administration and other states offered their legislative responses to the Dec. 14 rampage in Newtown, Conn. Other changes to the New York law would allow police officers to keep their high-capacity handguns and take a loaded gun on school grounds without permission from school officials. However, the need for a "cleanup" bill also means the fight over the law may not be over after all. An estimated 10,000 opponents of the new law are expected to descend on Albany on Thursday to try to persuade lawmakers to take advantage of an unexpected second shot at the law critics claim is unconstitutional. The law was passed in a flurry of closed-door negotiations, without public hearings or a three-day review required of bills under the state constitution. The measure was debated, passed and signed within hours, just days before President Barack Obama proposed his measures including tougher gun control. "Had they not rushed this bill through, this bill would never have become law," said Assembly Republican leader Brian Kolb. "This opposition would have been mobilized ... this bill would do nothing to prevent the tragedies." Most opponents have rallied around a call for repeal of the law, which would be impossible to pass through the Assembly led by New York City Democrats who have long championed gun control measures. But the cleanup bill provides an opportunity for lawmakers to submit more substantive changes. Others are considering a strategy of blocking the bill from passage, which could bolster the chances of a pending lawsuit that seeks to overturn the law. The law bans a broader array of military-style weapons, restricts ammunition magazines to seven rounds from 10, creates a more comprehensive database of people barred from owning guns, and makes New York the first state to require background checks to buy bullets. Therapists, doctors and other mental health professionals will be required to tell state authorities if a patient threatens to use a gun illegally. Mental health advocates are also seeking amendments to the law they say may interfere with treatment of potentially dangerous people and discourage them from seeking help. Cuomo and Sen. Jeffrey Klein, who co-sponsored the gun control legislation, said he and legislators are only discussing technical changes at this time. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 02, 2013, 12:11:53 pm http://news.yahoo.com/company-move-colo-approves-gun-control-160624180.html
3/2/13 Company will move if Colo. approves gun control ERIE, Colo. (AP) — Unnoticed amid dozens of tract homes in the Denver suburbs, a nondescript industrial building is suddenly in the middle of the gun control debate in Colorado. The company, started in an ex-Marine's basement in 1999, is in a standoff with Colorado Democrats who want to restrict the size of ammunition magazines after mass shootings in a suburban Denver movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school. Magpul has issued lawmakers an ultimatum potentially worth millions: Pass the bill, and the business will move. It's a bold threat from a company that, by its founder's admission, has distanced itself from politics. "The people who wrote the bill didn't even know we existed in the state," said Richard Fitzpatrick, the founder and president of the company that produces magazines and other firearm accessories for gun enthusiasts, law enforcement and the military. The warning from Erie-based Magpul underscores the political pressures Democrats are weighing as they advance the strictest gun-control measures lawmakers have ever considered in a state that still prides its frontier spirit. Other gun-control proposals include universal background checks, a ban on concealed firearms on campuses, and holding assault-weapon sellers and owners liable for shootings. Opponents need only three Democrats in the Senate to vote no against the magazine proposal to defeat it, and two have already said they won't support the bill. But most Democrats are not budging. "When you have the means available to you at every single corner to commit a horrendous act, we will continue to see what we've seen, which is the status quo, where unfortunately gun violence and violence in general is prevalent in our communities," said Democratic Sen. Jessie Ulibarri, who will be considering the magazine bill on Monday in the Judiciary Committee. The bill has already passed the House, and Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper has promised to sign it. The bill would make it a crime to have magazines that can carry more than 15 rounds, with a stricter limit of eight for shotguns. People who own larger magazines now would be allowed to keep them. As the debate unfolds, states have made overtures to Magpul, including offering to pay their moving costs. The company won't name the states, but Wyoming and Texas have expressed interest in netting the $85 million the company projects it will spend in Colorado next year in payments to suppliers, subcontractors and service providers. Magpul said the move would also impact its 200 employees, plus an additional 400 who work for suppliers and subcontractors. "It's not so much, 'Oh, these people are making something that's going to cost Colorado lives.' We truly believe this bill will do nothing. It's a feel-good measure," Fitzpatrick said. "But these (workers) will be directly affected." Fitzpatrick said the bill's requirement that all magazines have serial numbers adds enough production costs to make it worth leaving. He also said smaller magazines can be easily connected to each other — magazines can be hooked up to make a 60-round magazine, for example — and the company fears it would legally liable if people were to do that. Democrats have tried to ease Magpul's fears, amending the bill to make clear that the company can still manufacture magazines of any size, as long as they're sold only out-of-state, to the military or law enforcement. Republicans who oppose the restrictions argue Democrats are sending mixed messages about gun control to keep a company in Colorado. "It's being hypocritical. These things are either bad or they're not," said Republican Rep. Brian DelGrosso. Magpul argues that limiting magazine sizes will not reduce gun violence, and that criminals will find ways around laws, including going to other states to buy larger magazines. Magpul officials note that some of their products sometimes end up in California, which limits magazine sizes to 10 rounds. "The solutions that people want to bring up are hardware solutions," said Magpul Director Duane Liptak. "And they want to talk about this physical piece of equipment that's not inherently evil. It's not inherently good. It's a tool like anything else. It can be used for good, and it can be used improperly by people who have evil in their hearts." Supporters of the proposals say Magpul is bluffing and that a move would prove too costly. "I don't think Magpul is about to pull out," said Bill Hoover, 83, whose grandson AJ Boik was among the 12 killed in the theater shooting. "It's going to cost them a bundle of money." Fitzpatrick said his company is serious. "It's not really a threat. It's a promise," he said. Sens. Lois Tochtrop and Cheri Jahn are the two Democrats voting against the bill. Both say they don't believe it addresses the main problem — mental health — and Tochtrop also cited Magpul's potential departure. "I think we really need to address that problem. Look at the cause, not the tool," Tochtrop said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 03, 2013, 08:05:21 am Identifying mentally ill only small part in gun debate
Gun-control laws that require mental health professionals to report mentally ill people who are likely to harm others are unlikely to make a dent in gun violence, health researchers say. In the two months since the Newtown, Conn., school shooting, lawmakers across the country have been grappling with ways to prevent gun violence, including proposals to prevent more mentally ill people from buying guns. New York state's sweeping gun-control law requires mental health professionals to report the names of patients likely to seriously harm themselves or others. A Maryland state task force also recommended a proposal— ultimately rejected by the governor — requiring psychiatrists, teachers and others to report people who threaten "suicide or serious violence" to authorities. rest: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2013/03/03/mental-illness-gun-control/1928953/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 03, 2013, 10:47:01 am Maryland Senate Passes Governor O’Malley’s Gun Control Bill
After 10 hours of intense debate, the Maryland Senate passed Governor Martin O’Malley’s gun control measure handily late Thursday afternoon, 28-19, with all 12 Republicans and a handful of Democrats voting against the bill. The measure will be debated in the House next week, with passage nearly certain. After O’Malley signs the bill into law it will make Maryland’s gun laws among the most restrictive in the nation, putting the lie to the state’s moniker, “The Free State.” Maryland is also the nation’s wealthiest state, and its citizens currently have registered more than 1,200,000 of their firearms with the state under previous law. The new legislation will require gun owners, as well as new purchasers of firearms, to get fingerprinted, take eight hours of classroom study, and pay for a more extensive background check. In addition, no one will be able to buy a so-called “assault weapon” or purchase a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. The bill will also tighten up limits on gun ownership by residents committed against their will for mental health treatment. When O’Malley announced his proposal in January, he said that the requirements in it were “common-sense gun safety measures … [that] will give us the tools to combat … violence” but would also protect Marylanders’ Second Amendment rights. They were also touted as somehow being able to rein in criminal ownership of guns and reducing the firepower of those remaining in the hands of the public. At O’Malley’s public announcement, Baltimore County Police Chief Jim Johnson, a member of Vice President Joe Biden’s “National Law Enforcement Partnership,” said that that group “has been calling for background checks for all firearms purchasers, as well as a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons and ammunition magazines in excess of ten rounds… We must do all we can to ensure that we keep guns out of the wrong hands and that we keep excessive firepower out of our communities.” When the senate passed the bill, O’Malley declared: “It is a common-sense licensing requirement. If you have to get a license to drive a car in Maryland … you should have to be licensed in order to operate a firearm.” Maryland senate’s President Pro Tem Nathaniel McFadden, a member of the state senate for nearly 20 years, was delighted with the bill’s passage: Residents are sick and tired of this gun violence. No, this is not a perfect bill. Because you’re right — those criminals are not going to go and get fingerprinted. But somehow these guns find their way into our communities.… They come from somewhere, and you can get a gun quicker than you [can] get an apple or an orange in my community. It’s outrageous, and we have to start somewhere. rest: http://www.infowars.com/maryland-senate-passes-governor-omalleys-gun-control-bill Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 04, 2013, 11:31:33 am http://seekingalpha.com/article/1242881-fbi-firearm-background-checks-to-top-2m-in-february?source=yahoo
FBI Firearm Background Checks To Top 2M In February 3/4/13 The political push for new gun control measures continues to spur heightened demand for firearms. My company, Pipeline Data, estimates that February data will show there were 2,200,000 background checks done through the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This number will represent just a slight decline from the 2,495,000 checks performed in January. That was the second highest total on record (December was the highest with 2,784,000 checks). If accurate, February's figure will represent a 26% increase over February 2012, exceeding the 19% growth rate for all of 2012. If you think this is bullish for Sturm, Ruger & Co (RGR) and Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (SWHC), hold your horses - there's a little bear in the room. As you can see from the chart below, annual growth fluctuated throughout the year until September. After that month's 16% increase, growth steadily accelerated for several consecutive months. October came in at 20%. November's growth was 31%, followed by a 49% increase in December. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 05, 2013, 05:39:41 pm http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-lawmakers-advance-gun-control-162524793.html
3/5/13 Colorado lawmakers advance gun control bills Gun rights supporters descend on Colorado Capitol as lawmakers advance gun control bills DENVER (AP) -- A series of sweeping gun-control measures in Colorado is on track to hit the governor's desk by the end of the month, with Democratic committees in the Legislature advancing all the bills despite a Capitol packed with hundreds of opponents and surrounded by cars circling the Capitol blaring their horns. Gun limits including expanded background checks and ammunition magazine limits were helped Monday by testimony from the husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and victims of mass shootings in Connecticut and suburban Denver. Colorado has become a focus point in the national debate over what new laws, if any, are needed to prevent gun violence after recent mass shootings, including an attack at an Aurora movie theater last summer — a massacre that brought to mind the Columbine High School shooting of 1999 for many in the state and across the nation. The seven gun-control measures cleared their committees on 3-2 party-line votes and are planned for debate by the full Senate by Friday. Four of the seven have already cleared the House, making it possible some of them will land on the desk of Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper within weeks. "I think they'll all pass. I really do," said Democratic Senate President John Morse. "And I think they all should pass. I think any of them failing doesn't make Colorado as safe as we could make Colorado." A biplane flying above the Capitol Monday warned the governor, "HICK: DO NOT TAKE OUR GUNS!" Hickenlooper backs expanded background checks and has said he's considering a bill to limit ammunition magazines to 15 rounds. He hasn't indicated where he stands on other measures, including whether he supports a proposal that would hold sellers and owners of assault weapons liable for shootings by such firearms. Gun rights supporters walked the Capitol halls wearing stickers that read, "I Vote Pro-Gun." Several dozen people outside the Capitol waved American flags as light snow fell. Inside, retired astronaut and Navy captain Mark Kelly told lawmakers that he and his wife, Giffords, support the Second Amendment, but he said the right to bear arms shouldn't extend to criminals and the mentally ill. Kelly compared the different background check requirements for private and retail sales with having two different lines at the airport, one with security and one without. "Which one do you think the terrorist is going to choose?" he asked. Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Tucson, Ariz., was severely wounded in a mass shooting in January 2011 while meeting with constituents. Gun control opponents say the proposals will not reduce violence. They say lawmakers should focus on strengthening access to mental health services for people who could be dangerous to communities. The bill hearings were at times testy, and included some outbursts from the audience. After one bill passed, someone leaving the committee yelled "That sucks!" to lawmakers. "I've never seen such unprofessional behavior," Democratic Sen. Irene Aguilar told the audience at one point. The commotion at the Capitol underscored the attention the debate has generated nationally from gun rights groups, such as the National Rifle Association, to victims' families and White House officials. One of the nation's largest producers of ammunition magazines, Colorado-based Magpul, has threatened to leave the state if lawmakers restrict the size of its products. Its founder said smaller magazines can be easily connected to each other and the company fears it would be legally liable if people were to do that. Victims who have lost relatives to gun violence say it's time for legislators to take action. Tom Sullivan, whose son Alex was among the 12 killed in the Aurora theater shooting, was among the people urging lawmakers to pass magazine restrictions. "He was enjoying the movie one second, and then the next second he was dead," Tom Sullivan said. Jane Dougherty, whose sister, Mary Sherlach, was a psychologist killed in the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., has been lobbying Colorado lawmakers to pass new gun laws. She said she doesn't understand gun owners who worry the bills are putting a burden on their rights. She said the Connecticut shooter used "the same type of weapon that we use in war" to "slaughter these babies" and asked lawmakers for stricter gun laws. "We cannot wait for yet another massacre to transpire," Dougherty said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 05, 2013, 09:36:00 pm http://news.yahoo.com/key-republican-says-may-back-two-gun-control-011754966.html
3/5/13 Key Republican says he may back two gun-control bills WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican on the Democrat-led U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee said on Tuesday that he may back at least two of the four gun-control bills that the panel will consider this week. Iowa Senator Charles Grassley's support could help both measures - one aimed at cracking down on illegal gun trafficking, the other designed to bolster security at schools - pass the Senate. But Grassley, echoing many other Republicans in Congress, said he would not support a plan to renew a ban on the sale of military-style, semi-automatic "assault" weapons. Grassley's reluctance to embrace the assault weapons ban - and his hesitance on another measure that would expand background checks on prospective gun buyers - reflect the difficulty that Democrats are likely to face in getting a comprehensive gun-control package through Congress. more A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump...just saying... FYI, Grassley is a Freemason!(1:10 mark) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z27gmBMXuO0 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 06, 2013, 09:21:40 am http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/05/Homeland-Security-Drones-Designed-To-Identify-Civilians-Carrying-Guns
Homeland Security Drones Designed to Identify Civilians Carrying Guns 3/5/13 Recently uncovered government documents reveal that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) unmanned Predator B drone fleet has been customize designed to identify civilians carrying guns and track cell phone signals. "I am very concerned that this technology will be used against law-abiding American firearms owners," said founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation Alan Gottlieb. “This could violate Fourth Amendment rights as well as Second Amendment rights." The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained a partially redacted copy of Homeland Security’s drone requirements through a Freedom of Information Act request; CNET uncovered an unredacted copy. Homeland Security design requirements specify that its Predator B drones “shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not” and must be equipped with “interception” systems capable of reading cell phone signals. The first known domestic use of a drone to arrest a U.S. citizen occurred last year in the small town of Lakota, North Dakota when rancher Rodney Brossart was arrested for refusing to return six of his neighbor’s cows that had wandered on to his property. Critics say the fact that domestic drones are being used in such minor matters raises serious concerns about civil liberties and government overreach. "That drone is not just picking up information on what's happening at that specific scene, it's picking up everything else that's going on," says drone expert and Brookings Institution senior fellow Peter Singer. "Basically it's recording footage from a lot of different people that it didn't have their approval to record footage.” Others, like progressive author Naomi Wolf, have warned that domestic drones may soon be weaponized. The military version of the Predator B drone carries 100-pound Hellfire missiles, but the Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) says the 10 drones in its domestic fleet are unarmed. Last month, NBC News uncovered a confidential 16-page Justice Department memo that concluded the U.S. government may execute a drone strike on a American citizen it believes to be a “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force.” The Obama Administration defended the use of drones to kill Americans thought to be working with terrorists. “These strikes are legal, they are ethical, and they are wise,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 06, 2013, 12:02:11 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gun-advocates-part-ways-nra-background-check-issue-170211612--election.html
3/6/13 Gun manufacturers group won’t fight background checks The nation's leading lobby for gun manufacturers said in an interview with The Washington Post that it will not oppose legislation to expand background checks for gun purchases. "That’s more the NRA’s issue,” Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), told The Washington Post. “From the commercial side, we’re already there, and we’ve been there, and we were the ones that have been the strongest proponents of an effective, complete background check.” The group's position puts them at odds with the powerful National Rifle Association and is also a potential boon for a bipartisan group of senators working on legislation to expand background checks. Currently, gun buyers must pass a background check to prove they do not have a serious criminal record or have been declared mentally ill by a judge before they can purchase a weapon. But those who buy from private gun dealers can avoid this check. The NRA has taken a strong stance against expanding background checks to firearms sales made by private dealers, arguing that closing the loophole will still not stop criminals from getting guns. "When it comes to the issue of background checks, let’s be honest—background checks will never be 'universal' because criminals will never submit to them," NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre said at a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting in January. Expanding background checks has attracted more bipartisan support than some of the other laws sought by President Barack Obama and other Democrats, including renewing a ban on some semi-automatic weapons and banning high-capacity magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on March 06, 2013, 12:58:47 pm 50+ bills in the US Congress. This doesn’t include the plethora of state-by-state bills.
There are close to 30 bills in California legislature alone. http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_22724227/list-gun-bills-pending-congress-and-california-legislature U.S. SENATE S. 2, the Sandy Hook Elementary School Violence Reduction Act, by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. -- S.2 would express the Senate's support for the president's gun-violence reduction efforts and other common-sense proposals; for aid to law enforcement officers; for safe learning conditions for school students; for developing tools to identify people who pose a threat to themselves or others; for keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals and others not legally allowed to have them; and so on. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.2: S. 22, the Gun Show Background Check Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. --S.22 would require background checks for all firearms sales at gun shows, with "gun show" defined to include any place where more than 50 guns are on sale/display. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.22: S.33, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. -- S.33 would prohibit the sale, transfer, importation or possession of any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, unless it was made before the law's effective date. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00033: S.34, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. -- S. 34 would prohibit those on the government's terrorism watch list from buying a firearm or obtaining an explosives license. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00034: S.35, the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. -- S.35 would require face to face purchases of ammunition, require licensing of ammunition dealers, and require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00035: S.54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. -- S.54 would specifically prohibit the straw purchase of firearms and beef up the law prohibiting material false statements when purchasing a firearm, establishing penalties for anyone who buys a firearm or ammunition with the intent to transfer it to someone else, particularly in cases involving crimes of violence or drug trafficking. The bill also expands existing trafficking law to make it a crime for an individual to smuggle firearms out of the United States. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.54: S. 82, the Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. -- S. 82, the companion bill to HR 410, would invalidate any past, present or future executive actions on gun control, like those President Obama took Jan. 16, rendering them as advisory only unless Congress enacts them. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.82: S. 147, the Common Sense Concealed Firearms Permit Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. -- S. 147 would require that each state that allows residents to carry concealed firearms create a permit process involving local law enforcement and requiring that those receiving permits be legal U.S. residents, at least 21 years old, have good cause for requesting the permit, and demonstrate that he/she is worthy of public trust. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00147: S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- S.150 would ban semi-automatic weapons that can accept a detachable ammunition magazine and also have one or more specific military-style characteristics, including pistol grips, flash suppressors and a folding or telescoping stock. It also would ban large-capacity magazines and other ammunition-feeding devices holding more than 10 rounds. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00150: S.174, the Ammunition Background Check Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. -- S.174 would require an instant background check for the purchase of ammunition, and would restore pre-1986 requirements that sellers track their inventory and keep records of their customers; purchases of 1,000 rounds or more, or thefts of large amounts of ammunition, would have to be reported to law enforcement. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00174: S.179, the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y. -- S.179, like companion bill H.R.452, would make a federal crime of buying or transferring a firearm with the intent to deliver it to someone else who's barred by state or federal law from having it; impose prison terms of up to 20 years for such "straw purchasers"; and provide stiffer penalties for organizers or managers of firearms trafficking networks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00179: S.261, the No Firearms for Foreign Felons Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- S. 261 would prohibit anyone convicted of a felony or crime of domestic violence in a foreign court from possessing a firearm in the United States. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00261: S.374, the Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. -- S.374 would make congressional findings that Congress supports and respects Second Amendment rights and the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry, but also that the Justice Department should make a priority of closing holes in its firearm background check system and that citizens should be more vigilant about keeping firearms from dangerously mentally ill people. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00374: U.S. HOUSE HR 21, the NRA Members' Gun Safety Act of 2013, by Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. -- HR 21 would require a background check for every firearm sale or transfer, with the only exceptions being gifts between immediate family members; probate or executor transfers after the owner's death; a loan to someone who believes they need the firearm in their home to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm; and certain loans while target shooting, hunting, fishing or trapping. It also would require owners to report a firearm's theft or loss within 48 hours, and would require any state that allows concealed carry to establish a permit process if it doesn't already have one. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00021: HR 34, Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2013, by Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill. -- HR 34 would bar anyone from buying or owning a firearm without a background check and government-issued license; the U.S. Attorney General would establish a federal record-of-sale system, and any firearm thefts or losses would have to be reported to the government within three days. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00034: HR 35, the Safe Schools Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas -- HR 35 would repeal federal laws mandating "gun free zones" around schools. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.35: HR 65, the Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2013, by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas -- HR 65 would raise the minimum age for handgun ownership from 18 to 21; prohibit people under 21 from possessing "semiautomatic assault weapons or large capacity ammunition feeding devices"; stiffen federal criminal penalties for gun ownership violations by minors and for selling or giving handguns, assault weapons or large-capacity magazines to minors knowing they intended to use it for crime; requires all firearm sales to include a gun storage or locking device; prohibits keeping a loaded firearm or unloaded firearm and ammunition within a child's reach; and lets the attorney general provide federal grants for gun-safety classes for parents and children. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.65: HR 93, the Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act, by Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I. -- HR 93 would close the "fire sale loophole," which lets gun dealers with revoked licenses transfer their weapons to their private collections, then sell the firearms in inventory clearance sales without federal background checks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.93: HR 117, the Handgun Licensing and Registration Act of 2013, by Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J. -- HR 117 would require that each state provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of every handgun sold in the future. The bill is based upon New Jersey's mandatory handgun registration law. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00117: HR 133, the Citizens Protection Act of 2013 by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. -- HR 133 would repeal federal laws mandating "gun free zones" around schools. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.133: HR 137, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. -- HR 137 would require a background check for every firearm sale and "ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system," in part by widening the range of mental-health situations reportable to the FBI's background check database. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.137: HR 138, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. -- HR138 is the House companion bill to Lautenberg's S.33. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.138: HR 141, the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. -- HR 141 would require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.141: HR 142, the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. -- HR142 is the House companion bill to Lautenberg's S.35. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.142: HR 226, the Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction (SAFER) for our Streets Act, by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. -- HR 226 would create a $2,000 refundable tax credit ($1,000 for two consecutive years) for an assault weapon owner who turns in his or her firearm to state police. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.226: HR 227, the Buyback our Safety Act, by Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla. -- HR 227 authorizes $15 million over 5 years for the Justice Department to provide matching grants to local law enforcement agencies for firearms buyback programs. The bill also directs the National Academy of Sciences to identify guns most often used in violent crimes and create a pricing scale for buying such weapons. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.227: HR 236, the Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act of 2013, by Rep. James Langevin, D-RI -- HR 236 would increase the ability of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to inspect federal firearms licensees for compliance with recordkeeping requirements by increasing the allowable inspections per year from one to three; increase the penalties for knowingly misrepresenting any facts about a firearms sale; and authorize the attorney general to suspend a dealer's license and assess civil penalties for firearms violations, including failure to have secure gun storage or safety devices. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.236: HR 238, the Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act, by Rep. Grace Meng, D-N.Y. -- HR 238 would close the "fire sale loophole," which lets gun dealers with revoked licenses transfer their weapons to their private collections, then sell the firearms in inventory clearance sales without federal background checks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.238: HR 321, the Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. -- HR 321 would release the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health from restrictions placed on them in 1996 that have prohibited them from conducting peer-reviewed research into gun violence prevention. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.321: HR 322, the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. -- HR 322 would exclude all firearm and ammunition components from the definition of "chemical substance" under federal environmental laws, so that the lead and other substances in ammunition couldn't be regulated or restricted. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.322: HR 329, the Strengthening Background Checks Act of 2013, by Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick, R-Pa. -- H.R. 329 would require states to share mental-health information with the FBI's system or else lose 10 percent of their federal Justice Assistance Grants for local police. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00329: HR 332, the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank -- HR 332 lets civil cases proceed against irresponsible bad actors in the gun industry who turn blind eyes to straw purchases and trafficking, overriding a 2005 law that providing immunity from civil liability in state and federal court for gun makers, distributors and dealers. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.332: HR 339, the Fairness in Firearm Testing Act, by Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga. -- HR 339 amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to make a video recording of the entire process of its examination and testing of an item for the purpose of determining if it's a firearm (and if so, the firearm's type) or ammunition; the bill also bars ATF from editing or erasing any such recording. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.339: HR 404, the Straw Purchaser Penalty Enhancement Act, by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank -- HR 404 adds more prison time for those convicted of making straw purchases of firearms, and forbids courts from putting such convicts on probation or reducing their prison term to compensate for multiple convictions. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.404: HR 410, the Restore the Constitution Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas -- HR 410, the companion bill to S. 82, would invalidate any past, present or future executive actions on gun control, like those President Obama took Jan. 16, rendering them as advisory only unless Congress enacts them. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.410: HR 427, the Trafficking Reduction and Criminal Enforcement (TRACE) Act, by Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill. -- HR 427 would require that federal background check records be maintained for at least 180 days, rather than the current 24-hour limit; that gun dealers do inventory checks to report lost or stolen guns; and that new firearms include a second, hidden serial number printed inside the receiver which could only be removed by dismantling the entire weapon. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.427: HR 431, the Gun Transparency and Accountability Act of 2013, by Rep. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo -- HR 431 would abolish a series of 2004 amendments that weakened gun safety rules: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives could once again use information on guns traced to crimes; background check information wouldn't have to be destroyed within 24 hours; and the ban on federally required inventory audits of gun dealerships would be lifted. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.431: HR 437, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. -- HR 437 is the House companion bill to Feinstein's S.150. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00437: HR 449, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. -- HR 449 would provide a 90-day amnesty period during which veterans and their family members can register in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record any firearm acquired before October 31, 1968, by a veteran while a member of the Armed Forces stationed outside the continental United States. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.449: HR 452, the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. -- HR 452 would make a federal crime of buying or transferring a firearm with the intent to deliver it to someone else who's barred by state or federal law from having it; impose prison terms of up to 20 years for such "straw purchasers;" and provide stiffer penalties for organizers or managers of firearms trafficking networks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.452: HR 538, the Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act (PLEA) Act, by Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y. -- HR 538 would expand federal law's definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include certain handgun ammunition that can pierce body armor, and would ban the making, sale and possession of any handgun that uses such ammunition. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.538: HR 575, the Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas -- HR 575 would express the sense of Congress that the United States should not adopt any treaty that threatens national sovereignty or abridges rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as the right to bear arms, and should stop providing financial support to any entity that does so. It would bar the United States from providing any funding to the United Nations for a fiscal year unless the president certifies to Congress that the U.N. has not acted to infringe on individuals' rights in the United States to have a firearm or ammunition, or abridge any other constitutionally protected rights of U.S. citizens. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.575: HR 577, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas -- HR 577 would make sure any veteran deemed mentally incapacitated, mentally incompetent or experiencing an extended loss of consciousness in a Department of Veterans Affairs case is not considered mentally defective for purposes of prohibition from firearm ownership without a separate court order or finding that the person is a danger to self or others. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.577: HR 578, the Respecting States' Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013, by Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind. -- HR 578 would guarantee that individuals who legally carry a concealed weapon in their home state may also carry in any other state that allows concealed carry. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.578: HR 602, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. -- HR 602 is the same as HR 577. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00602: HR 619, the Keep Kids Safe Act of 2013, by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y. -- HR 619 would prohibit possession of a firearm by, or the sale or transfer of a firearm to, anyone who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor sex offense against a minor. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00619: HR 661, the Tiahrt Restrictions Repeal Act, by Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland -- Like HR 427 and HR 431, HR 661 would repeal current provisions that require federal firearm background check records to be destroyed within 24 hours; prohibit ATF from requiring licensed dealers to conduct annual inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns; and restrict state and local authorities from using trace data to fully investigate corrupt gun dealers and traffickers. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00661: HR 720, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2013, by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. -- HR 720 would let the attorney general deny the right to buy firearms or to get a firearms and explosive license to anyone engaged in, or who has providing material support to, terrorism and might use a firearm or explosive to terroristic ends; those denied firearms or licenses could challenge it in court. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00720: HR 722, the Detectives Nemorin and Andrews Anti-Gun Trafficking Act of 2013, by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. -- HR 722 would impose stiffer penalties for gun-trafficking crimes; expand the Justice Department's "Project Safe Neighborhoods" program; require the attorney general to make a report to Congress every two years on gun traces and trafficking prosecutions; require the FBI to share its National Crime Information Center Stolen Gun File with ATF; impose a 5-year prison term for having a stolen firearm or a firearm with an obliterated serial number while committing any felony; and impose a 7-, 9- or 12-year penalty for using such a firearm during a violent or drug-trafficking crime. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00722: HR 793, the Firearm Safety and Buyback Grant Act of 2013, by Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Cerritos -- HR 793 would establish a grant program within the Department of Justice in which grants would be eligible to state, tribal and local units of government and law enforcement agencies to carry out anti-violence campaigns, gun safety campaigns and firearms buyback programs. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00793: HR 848, the Armed Prohibited Persons Act of 2013, by Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Napa -- H.R. 848 would make federal grants available to states that develop programs with the goal of removing firearms from people no longer allowed to own guns due to criminal convictions, mental illness incidents or other causes. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.848: H.Res. 40 by Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga. -- H.Res.40 would expresses the House's sense that active-duty military personnel stationed or living in the District of Columbia should be allowed to fully exercise their Second Amendment rights and be exempt from the district's gun control laws. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d113:40:./list/bss/d113HE.lst:: H.Res. 55 by Rep. Frederica Wilson, D-Fla. -- H.Res.55 would condemn "unfounded reliance on Stand Your Ground laws to protect actions that extend far beyond historical use of self-defense;" urge any state legislature to reject or repeal such bills and laws; calls for creating incentives for states to find alternatives to such laws, such as community-policing grants; encourages states to create penalties for those found to have caused "substantive harm" through racial profiling;" and urges the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to seek to study black males' higher rates of school expulsions and suspensions, homicides, incarceration, poverty, violence, drug abuse and other disparities. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d113:55:./list/bss/d113HE.lst:: Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 06, 2013, 05:37:34 pm See, that to me shows that politicians are out of control and not listening to the people they represent. The sheer number of bills submitted each year is mind boggling. And all of this takes place outside of the public's ability to vote on anything. Politicians simply pass a bill and the president signs it into law. Done. No public input allowed, though they tell the public to "contact your congressman". Yeah right. That's all backwards, as the politician is suppose to contact the public and ask them what they want, not tell the public how it's going to be.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 06, 2013, 09:02:47 pm http://news.yahoo.com/giffords-urges-support-background-checks-203406672.html
3/6/13 Giffords Visits Rampage Site, Urges Gun Control Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords returned to the scene of the horrific shooting that wounded her and killed six people two years ago, urging senators Wednesday to pass background checks for gun purchases in her first public event at the site since the rampage. Giffords, who is still recovering from her injuries, spoke fewer than 20 words in the parking lot of the Safeway grocery store in her hometown of Tucson in a brief but emotional call for stricter gun control measures. "Be bold. Be courageous," Giffords said. "Please support background checks." At one point, Giffords pumped her fist in the air and grinned. Other survivors joined Giffords at the news conference, along with her husband, Mark Kelly. Giffords and Kelly have returned to the Safeway previously to visit the memorial, but Wednesday marked their first public event at the store since the shooting. Sheriff's deputies were there to provide security. A gun control group started by Giffords and Kelly began airing a new television ad in Arizona and Iowa Tuesday urging Congress to take action. Giffords and Kelly support extending background checks to gun shows and Internet purchases. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to take up tougher firearm regulations Thursday. Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, who sits on the committee, has criticized universal background checks. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on March 07, 2013, 04:36:05 am (http://imageftw.com/uploads/20130307/486627_145971215570285_1293026540_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 07, 2013, 07:17:41 am :D
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 07, 2013, 11:39:08 am http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-owners-lawyering-even-shots-fired-191305639.html
Gun owners arming themselves with lawyers even before shots are fired 3/7/13 Beyond guilt or innocence, the case against Florida murder suspect George Zimmerman will undoubtedly leave him broke. The controversial concealed handgun license holder made headlines last spring when he claimed he killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in self-defense during a violent scuffle. Zimmerman hasn’t worked in the year since the shooting and faces a mountain of debt to avoid a possible 25 years to life in prison. “He’s going through $1 million of costs, and his life is being destroyed because he acted properly in the use of his weapon,” his attorney, Mark O’Mara, told Yahoo News. “Other people need to learn a very expensive lesson from George, in that you need to be careful even when you use your weapon properly.” Gun owners seem to be heeding the message that, even in self-defense, pulling the trigger can be a costly proposition. Exact stats aren’t kept, but anecdotal evidence points to more gun owners proactively seeking legal assistance. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 07, 2013, 05:07:11 pm http://news.yahoo.com/senate-committee-oks-bill-curbing-gun-purchases-185202608--politics.html
3/7/13 Senate committee OKs bill curbing gun purchases WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation Thursday toughening laws against people who illegally buy guns for others as lawmakers cast the first votes in Congress to curb firearms since December's horrific shootings at a Connecticut elementary school. The panel was also debating bills banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines, requiring background checks for nearly all gun purchases, and providing more money for schools to buy video cameras and other safety equipment. The committee voted 11-7 to approve the measure, which boosted penalties against straw purchases, when people legally buy firearms for criminals or others legally barred from owning one. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, was the only Republican to vote in favor of the measure, whose chief sponsor was the panel's chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. "We know that many guns used in criminal activities are acquired through straw purchases. We need a meaningful solution to this serious problem," Leahy said. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on March 07, 2013, 08:34:07 pm (http://imageftw.com/uploads/20130307/538106_10151475380405726_1276576893_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 08, 2013, 03:34:24 am ;D
Exactly! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 09, 2013, 05:48:48 am Cupcakes With Army Soldiers Get Kid In Hot Water At School
A 9-year-old boy’s birthday cupcakes sparked a school controversy that just keeps growing, with scores of people lining up against a school principal who found the cupcake’s topping “inappropriate.” The boy was chided, and so were his parents, for cupcakes featuring little green Army men on the top. Schall Elementary School principal Susan Wright called the parents at home and said the cupcakes were insensitive in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting. School staff pulled off the Army men before they were served. The parents reacted by calling the media. And the principal, who refused to speak publicly on the issue, issued an extensive statement that said, in part: “In the climate of recent events in schools we walk a delicate balance in teaching non-violence in our buildings and trying to ensure a safe, peaceful atmosphere. On one hand, there are those who advocate arming teachers, having armed security guards and creating a fortress of defense in our schools. On the other hand, there are those who feel that guns create fear in schools and we need to put solid security measures in place plus practice routines to be prepared in case an emergency should ever occur. Living in a democratic society entails respect for opposing opinions.” She added that some parents “prohibit all guns as toys,” and “no disrespect” was intended for members of the military, however, “Our commitment is always to our children and creating a safe place for them to learn, grow and have respectful dialogues about their differences.” Martial arts instructor Josh Brown, who teaches both the father and son through his school at Caro Martial Arts, is one of the outraged local residents. “He’s a little 9-year-old kid and it was his birthday cupcakes,” Brown said. “These guys (soldiers) are heroes, and too many people are confusing them with psychopaths.” http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/03/08/cupcakes-with-army-soldiers-get-kid-in-hot-water-at-school/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 09, 2013, 05:51:01 am Feinstein: Veterans May Have PTSD And Should Not Be Exempt From Assault Weapons Ban
At a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on Thursday, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) opposed an amendment to her Assault Weapons Ban legislation that would allow military veterans to continue to buy the firearms that would be banned. Feinstein says a veteran may be mentally ill and should be prevented from purchasing firearms. SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN: If I understand this, this adds an exemption of retired military. As I understand our bill, no issue has arose in this regard during the 10 years the expired ban was in effect and what we did in the other bill was exempt possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States. So that included active military. The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transferrer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member, or a veteran, and that there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this. So, you know, I would be happy to sit down with you again and see if we could work something out but I think we have to-- if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally don’t have access to this kind of weapon. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/08/feinstein_veterans_may_have_ptsd_and_should_not_be_exempt_from_assault_weapons_ban.html Sen. Feinstein Makes Wild Claim to Push Gun Control at Senate Committee Hearing During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun control Thursday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) shot down a proposed amendment to her “assault weapons” ban that would exempt military veterans from the gun ban. She also made some questionable claims. Pushing a ban on high-capacity magazines, Feinstein argued that it is “legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.” Here’s her dubious rationale: “The time has come, America, to step up and ban these weapons. The other very important part of this bill is to ban large capacity ammunition feeding devices, those that hold more than 10 rounds. We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds. And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines. Limiting magazine capacity is critical because it is when a criminal, a drug dealer, a deranged individual has to pause to change magazines and reload that the police or brave bystanders have the opportunity to take that individual down.” http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/08/sen-feinstein-makes-bizarre-claim-to-push-gun-control-at-hearing-its-legal-to-hunt-humans-with-high-capacity-magazines/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 10, 2013, 03:41:21 am She's a total nut job. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 10, 2013, 10:19:23 pm Cupcakes With Army Soldiers Get Kid In Hot Water At School Believe me - I've seen FAR worse in my days in elementary school in the 80's than THIS. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 11:05:22 am http://news.yahoo.com/ap-enterprise-nixon-wished-total-handgun-ban-081806381.html
3/11/13 AP Enterprise: Nixon Wished for Total Handgun Ban Few presidents in modern times have been as interested in gun control as Richard Nixon, of all people. He proposed ridding the market of Saturday night specials, contemplated banning handguns altogether and refused to pander to gun owners by feigning interest in their weapons. Several previously unreported Oval Office recordings and White House memos from the Nixon years show a conservative president who at times appeared willing to take on the National Rifle Association, a powerful gun lobby then as now, even as his aides worried about the political ramifications. "I don't know why any individual should have a right to have a revolver in his house," Nixon said in a taped conversation with aides. "The kids usually kill themselves with it and so forth." He asked why "can't we go after handguns, period?" Nixon went on: "I know the rifle association will be against it, the gun makers will be against it." But "people should not have handguns." He laced his comments with obscenities, as was typical. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 12:29:14 pm http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/colorado-senate-voting-gun-control-bills-18702617
Colorado Senate Voting on Gun Control Bills 3/11/13 Colorado senators were expected to take final votes Monday on several gun-control measures, including on magazine ammunition limits and expanded background checks. The chamber was debating five of seven bills in the Democrats' gun-control package. Other measures included a gun ban for people accused of domestic violence crimes and a ban on online-only gun training for a concealed carry permit. The final measure would revive background check fees for gun purchasers. Republican Senate Leader Bill Cadman said the Democrats have an "anti-gun agenda" and that the measures they sponsored wouldn't make Colorado safer. Speaking against the domestic-violence bill, Cadman said Democrats believe "guns are the problem in society and not the people that use those guns." The gun measures were given initial approval Friday after more than 12 hours of debate. Two parts of the Democratic gun package were pulled because of lack of support. Those were a liability measure for gun owners and a concealed-weapons ban on college campuses. Even without the two most divisive Democratic proposals, the gun-control package attracted plenty of opposition. Gun-right supporters were especially steamed about the magazine ammunition limit, which has prompted at least one company to threaten to leave Colorado. Magpul, an accessories maker in Erie, has said it will ship hundreds of jobs out of state, even though the ammunition bill was amended to allow Magpul to keep making the magazines for out-of-state sale. Republicans have complained that Democrats are wrong to limit ammunition magazines over Magpul's threats. "Jobs, jobs, jobs — all leaving Colorado," Republican Sen. Scott Renfroe said last week. Republicans are also deeply opposed to the bill to expand required background checks to private sales. Democrats changed that bill to exempt short-term loans among relatives. But Republicans insist that any move toward universal background checks is a move toward gun ownership registration. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 02:07:36 pm http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-senate-final-ok-gun-185606090.html
3/11/13 Colorado Senate give final OK to gun control bills Colorado Senate gives final OK to gun bills, including magazine limits and background checks DENVER (AP) -- The Colorado Senate is approving stricter firearms regulations including expanded background checks, as it ties gun control to mass shootings in the state and elsewhere. Final votes on the proposals Monday cap a week of intense debate in Colorado's Capitol over gun violence and how to prevent it. Democrats have abandoned two of their seven gun-control proposals because of strong opposition. But five measures were due final Senate approval Monday. Most of them now head to the House or return there because of Senate amendments. The most divisive measure given a final vote Monday was a bill to require background checks on private gun sales. Republicans tried to argue expanded background checks are "absurd" and won't improve safety. But they managed to persuade only one Democrat to vote against the bill. Title: California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Bear Arms Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 09:29:22 pm California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Bear Arms
3/11/13 Wearing bulletproof vests and carrying 40-caliber Glock pistols, nine California Justice Department agents assembled outside a ranch-style house in a suburb east of Los Angeles. They were looking for a gun owner who’d recently spent two days in a mental hospital. They knocked on the door and asked to come in. About 45 minutes later, they came away peacefully with three firearms. California is the only state that tracks and disarms people with legally registered guns who have lost the right to own them, according to Attorney General Kamala Harris. Almost 20,000 gun owners in the state are prohibited from possessing firearms, including convicted felons, those under a domestic violence restraining order or deemed mental unstable. “What do we do about the guns that are already in the hands of persons who, by law, are considered too dangerous to possess them?” Harris said in a letter to Vice President Joe Biden after a Connecticut school shooting in December left 26 dead. She recommended that Biden, heading a White House review of gun policy, consider California as a national model. As many as 200,000 people nationwide may no longer be qualified to own firearms, according to Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis. Other states may lack confiscation programs because they don’t track purchases as closely as California, which requires most weapons sales go through a licensed dealer and be reported. “Very, very few states have an archive of firearm owners like we have,” said Wintemute, who helped set up the program. Funding Increase Harris, a 48-year-old Democrat, has asked California lawmakers to more than the number of agents from the current 33 who seized about 2,000 weapons last year, along with 117,000 rounds of ammunition and 11,000 high-capacity magazines, according to state data. “We’re not contacting anybody who can legally own a gun,” said John Marsh, a supervising agent who coordinates the sometimes-contentious seizures. “I got called the Antichrist the other day. Every conspiracy theory you’ve heard of, take that times 10.” The no-gun list is compiled by cross-referencing files on almost 1 million handgun and assault-weapon owners with databases of new criminal records and involuntary mental-health commitments. About 15 to 20 names are added each day, according to the attorney general’s office. Probable Cause Merely being in a database of registered gun owners and having a “disqualifying event,” such as a felony conviction or restraining order, isn’t sufficient evidence for a search warrant, Marsh said March 5 during raids in San Bernardino County. So the agents often must talk their way into a residence to look for weapons, he said. At a house in Fontana, agents were looking for a gun owner with a criminal history of a sex offense, pimping, according to the attorney general’s office. Marsh said that while the woman appeared to be home, they got no answer at the door. Without a warrant, the agents couldn’t enter and had to leave empty- handed. They had better luck in nearby Upland, where they seized three guns from the home of Lynette Phillips, 48, who’d been hospitalized for mental illness, and her husband, David. One gun was registered to her, two to him. “The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office. Involuntarily Held In an interview as agents inventoried the guns, Lynette Phillips said that while she’d been held involuntarily in a mental hospital in December, the nurse who admitted her had exaggerated the magnitude of her condition. Todd Smith, chief executive officer of Aurora Charter Oak Hospital in Covina, where documents provided by Phillips show she was treated, didn’t respond to telephone and e-mail requests for comment on the circumstances of the treatment. Phillips said her husband used the guns for recreation. She didn’t blame the attorney general’s agents for taking the guns based on the information they had, she said. “I do feel I have every right to purchase a gun,” Phillips said. “I’m not a threat. We’re law-abiding citizens.” No one was arrested. “It’s not unusual to not arrest a mental-health person because every county in the state handles those particular cases differently,” Gregory said by e-mail. “Unless there’s an extenuating need to arrest them on the spot, we refer the case” to the local district attorney’s office, she said. Convicted Felons Agents more often arrest convicted felons who are prohibited from buying, receiving, owning or possessing a firearm, Gregory said. Violation of the ban is itself a felony. The state Senate agreed March 7 to expand the seizure program using $24 million in surplus funds from fees that gun dealers charge buyers for background checks. Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, a gun lobby that says it has more than 4 million individuals as members, didn’t respond to a request for comment on the program. Sam Paredes, executive director of the Folsom-based advocacy group Gun Owners of California, praised the program, though not how it is funded. “We think that crime control instead of gun control is absolutely the way to go,” he said. “The issue we have is funding this program only from resources from law-abiding gun purchasers. This program has a benefit to the entire public and therefore the entire public should be paying through general- fund expenditures, and not just legal gun owners.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 12, 2013, 03:45:34 am Quote Without a warrant, the agents couldn’t enter and had to leave empty- handed. And that is apparently the hole in their little scam. Why can't they get a warrant if the gun owner is not legally allowed to posses a firearm? Hmm, sounds like they are playing legal games with gun owners. There's a legal hold up for police somehow, requiring them to get a warrant, or ask to search for weapons in a home, which home owners should not consent to a search without a lawyer advising. Got to watch police. They will try to snake their way in your car, house, whatever, without a warrant by asking to search. Don't agree, ever. Make them get a warrant if in fact they have serious cause. Make them do their jobs! Example: We had a deal where my wife received as it were a prank phishing phone call, threatening her, etc, so she called the police to report it because the called was making all kinds of threats to come by the house, cause our family problems, etc. A real thug caller. So the cop shows up, and we meet him outside. We talk for a bit, then he asks if we want to go inside to get out of the heat, to which I said, "No, we're fine", while he's standing there in a black uniform wearing a vest and the rest of the hardware they carry. I suspect he was rather warm! But there was no reason for him to come inside. It took maybe 10 minutes. But that's how they do it, by putting people in a spot where they think they must say yes, but they don't and shouldn't, especially if it has nothing to do with the inside of your home. Otherwise, he gets inside your house, and he decides he sees something illegal, and bingo, you got major issues you wouldn't have had had he not got inside your house, or car, etc. As for California and their antics? Typical. People need to leave that state to it's politicians and the freaks in Hollywood. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2013, 05:27:29 pm http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/12/17286635-sources-nra-wont-oppose-background-check-deal-if-democrats-cede-tough-records-fight?lite
3/12/13 Sources: NRA won't oppose background check deal – if Democrats cede tough records fight Senators negotiating a bill mandating background checks for all gun buyers are privately expecting the National Rifle Association not to fight the measure -- provided the legislation does not require private gun sellers to maintain records of the checks, NBC News has learned. If that requirement is met and key Republican negotiator Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma signs on, the powerful gun lobby has signaled to lawmakers that they would not actively oppose the bill -- and not count votes in favor of it as part of its highly influential NRA lawmaker ratings -- according to Senate aides familiar with the stalled negotiations. Such a deal could clear the way for a universal background check bill, a central tenet of President Barack Obama's gun control initiative, to pass the Senate with significant Republican support. Odds of passage in the House would brighten significantly as a result. The NRA denies being part of any agreement. "We do not take positions on hypotheticals. We will make our position known if and when legislation is introduced," said Chris Cox, the group's top lobbyist. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2013, 08:34:21 pm Seriously, what is the point of doing something like this? Will these "cross country" activities like what Susan G. Komen does just "magically" make something good? And doesn't this feel like witchcraft?
http://news.yahoo.com/cyclists-ride-nations-capital-gun-control-sandy-hook-233406239--abc-news-politics.html 3/12/13 Cyclists Ride to Nation's Capital for Gun Control After Sandy Hook The sun came out over the West Lawn of the Capitol building Monday afternoon, warming up a group of shivering cyclists who rode over 400 miles to convince Congress to pass what they called "common sense" gun control legislation. The cyclists, known as Team 26, began riding on Saturday from Newtown, Conn., the site of the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December. The team was made up of Connecticut residents, including a Newtown police officer and a Vietnam war veteran. Team 26 founder Monte Frank told ABC News that the group got a big lift Tuesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee announced the passage of a bill that would require universal background checks for gun buyers. But he said there were two more needs to be done, including bans on military assault-style weapons and high capacity magazines. "We have been motivated all along by 26 angels who've been pushing us along," said Frank, joined Tuesday by his young daughter, Sarah, whose third grade teacher was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. "If those bills are enacted, they will go a long way toward removing dangerous military style weapons from our streets and ensuring that the weapons in people's possessions are in the right people's possession. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on March 13, 2013, 05:19:21 am California seizes guns from owners - and it might become a national model
In California, the government is already coming for the guns. Notwithstanding the Second Amendment, rules and regulations across the United States outline certain restrictions for who can legally possess a firearm. In the state of California, factors such as a felony conviction or a history of mental health issues mean roughly 20,000 gun owners are holding onto their firearms illegally. Slowly but surely, though, Golden State police officers are prying them away. There’s more, though: backers of the program suggest this becomes a nation-wide practice, and are asking the White House to help make it happen. “Very, very few states have an archive of firearm owners like we have,” Garen Wintemute of the Violence Prevention Research Program tells Bloomberg News. Wintemute helped set up a program on the West Coast that monitors not just licensed gun owners but also watches for any red flags that could be raised after admittance to a mental health institute or a quick stint in the slammer. Wintemute says that as many as 200,000 people across the United States may no longer be qualified to own firearms, and in California they are making sure that number drops day by day. In one example cited in this week’s Bloomberg report, journalists recall a recent scene where nine California Justice Department agents equipped with 40-caliber Glock pistols and outfitted in bulletproof vests knocked on a suburban residence, requested to speak to a certain gun owner and then walked away with whatever arsenal they could apprehend. California Attorney General Kamala Harris seized roughly 2,000 weapons last year, reports Bloomberg, as well as 117,000 rounds of ammunition and 11,000 high-capacity magazines. But as concerns escalate about a possible war against the right to bear arms in America, will other states soon follow suite? In California, some shortcuts are already meaning weapons are being removed from lawful owners. Bloomberg reports cite the example of 48-year-old Lynette Phillips, a California woman who was recently hospitalized for mental illness. When a team of agents went to collect her two registered firearms, they also walked out with one registered to her husband. “The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office. In other cities and towns across the country, Americans are standing up against what many say are unconstitutional attempts to disarm the United States. In New York State, new legislation is making it harder for Americans to purchase firearms, and one provision will provide gun owners with a felony charge if they ignore new registration rules — which is enough on its own to make owning guns illegal. Across the board more states are demanding stricter background checks, but as efforts to remove weapons from the hands of Americans — voluntarily and involuntarily — are ramped up, though, those that disagree are doing what they can to keep their country armed. In the wake of last year’s massacres in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut — among others — lawmakers and the public at large have called on Americans for a mass disarming. Gun buyback programs are being touted in countless cities, and in California the attorney general is hoping for even more help at getting guns away from their once-lawful owners — Attorney General Harris has asked Vice President Joe Biden for help and has asked state lawmakers to increase the number of agents tasked with collecting weapons up to 33. She also told Mr. Biden that she thought the efforts coming out of California could be a good model of a national program, reports Bloomberg. Meanwhile, though, others are making sure weapons aren’t being put to waste. Residents in Maine hit the polls this week to vote on a law that would require everyone in the town of Byron to register a high-powered weapon. "It was never my intention to force anyone to own a gun who doesn't want to. My purpose was to make a statement in support of the Second Amendment,” Head Selectman Anne Simmons-Edmund tells US News & World Report. "I'm just here because I'd rather see weapons stay with people, rather than turned in to be melted," a man named Joe, who declined to provide his last name, tells the Bainbridge Island Review. "I'm here to exercise the Second Amendment," he added. "Even if I don't get anything, honestly, I'd just rather see people keep them." http://rt.com/usa/california-gun-program-model-157/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 13, 2013, 09:39:47 pm http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-13/california-to-audit-owners-losing-right-to-bear-arms.html?cmpid=yhoo
3/13/13 California to Audit Owners Losing Right to Bear Arms California will audit its program that confiscates guns for residents who are prohibited from possessing them, to insure those who are disqualified are reported promptly. Lawmakers on the Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved a request for the review. Republicans sought the inquiry, citing a 2010 study of states other than California by the National Center for State Courts that found fewer than half of those who should have been reported to local police for background checks were processed. California is the only state that tracks and disarms people with legally registered guns who have lost the right to own them, according to Attorney General Kamala Harris. Almost 20,000 gun owners in the state are prohibited from possessing firearms, including convicted felons, those under a domestic-violence restraining order or deemed mentally unstable. “Keeping guns out of the hands of felons and other individuals who have been deemed ineligible to possess firearms is vital,” Assemblyman Katcho Achadjian, a Republican from San Luis Obispo, said yesterday. Since California was not one of the states in the 2010 study, Achadjian said a thorough review is needed to determine if state and local officials were reporting and processing the necessary information. The Dec. 14 killings of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the second deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, reignited a national debate over gun-control laws, stricter bans on assault weapons and better screening and care for the mentally ill. California’s no-gun list is compiled by cross-referencing files on almost 1 million handgun and assault-weapon owners in the state with databases of new criminal records and involuntary mental-health commitments. About 15 to 20 names are added to the list each day, according to the attorney general’s office. These individuals are supposed to be immediately reported to the state Justice Department. Local police can check the list when conducting background checks for gun purchases. Someone who is on the prohibited persons list would not be allowed to legally purchase a firearm. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 14, 2013, 05:22:39 am Something like that isn't possible in Arizona. Not unless they overturn some laws here. As it is, residents can legally purchase a weapon with no checks, licenses, etc. No requirement to register either unless you buy from a federally licensed gun dealer, and we also have open or concealed carry with no permit required.
Arizona is about as close to the Constitution as it can get when it comes to gun laws. And why are people still living in California? ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 14, 2013, 10:26:48 am Senate Judiciary Committee approves assault weapons ban in a party -line vote, 10-8 - @AP
an assault weapons ban in a party -line vote that underscores how hard it will be for the measure to survive in the full Senate. The proposal by California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein was approved on a 10-8 vote Thursday by the Democratic-controlled committee. An assault rifle was used by the man who killed 26 elementary school students and staff in Newtown, Conn., in December. Banning the weapons is key to President Barack Obama's plan to curb gun violence. The measure is not expected to survive in the Senate. Feinstein faces overwhelming GOP opposition and likely defections by up to six moderate Democrats facing re-election next year in Republican-leaning states in the South and West. rest: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/senate-committee-ready-ok-assault-weapons-ban Title: Democrats, Republicans and NRA work together on gun confiscation Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2013, 11:40:56 am http://www.infowars.com/democrats-republicans-and-nra-work-together-on-gun-confiscation/
Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com March 12, 2013 Dianne Feinstein’s assault weapon ban now appears to be a little more than decoy sent out to be shot down while the real work on gun control legislation is hammered out by Democrats, Republicans and the NRA behind closed doors. According to sources cited by Ammoland.com, the “NRA is cutting back room deals to centralize gun owner data collection into the Obama/Holder massive government data base.” Republicans are working with Democrats to pass legislation that will require records be kept on all gun sales and also move to streamline and improve the database. “Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor is leading the charge to give Obama and Holder what they want in exchange for appearing to be ‘fixing’ the problem of innocent children being butchered in our public and private schools,” the website reports. The collusion reaches all the way to the top of the Republican party. “Newly appointed Republican Judiciary Chairman, Bob Goodlatte R-VA 6th District, is providing political cover for the sneaky back room gun control deals and gun grabbing sell outs that his political masters - – John Boehner and Eric Cantor – are cutting [deals] with Obama and his corrupt Attorney General, Eric Holder.” Goodlette is also colluding with Virginia Republican Congressman Scott Rigell on his House version of Vermont Senator Pat Leahy’s S. 443, titled “The Forced Gun Owner Registration Act” by Ammoland.com. If Leahey’s bill is enacted, Republicans and the NRA will claim they saved the Second Amendment by preventing Feinstein’s gun-grabbing bill from clearing the Senate. At the same time, the establishment media has rolled out a number of public survey polls claiming Americans overwhelmingly approve of registering nearly all firearms under a universal background check scheme. Bipartisan negotiations hit a snag in the Senate due to demands by Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn, who opposes record keeping aspects of the Democrat assault on the Second Amendment. “Coburn got hung up on record keeping. Under the bill, all guns sold at gun shows would require a background check, and the seller would keep a record of the sale — just as federally-licensed retailers do now,” the Chicago Tribune reported on Sunday. The newspaper said if Coburn’s version of the legislation is enacted, private sales between individuals “would not be turned over to the government. It would not become part of a national database. It would not lead to mass gun confiscation.” On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Sen. Chuck Schumer’s “ideal approach” proposal to broaden background check requirements for all gun sales in the United States, including measures Coburn opposed. The vote went straight down partisan lines, as expected. Passing the measure out of the committee indicates a potential compromise between Democrats and Republicans and signals that the bill stands a good chance of getting the 60 votes required to pass in the Senate. Last week bipartisan negotiations fizzled as Coburn stuck to his guns on record keeping and the prospect of a massive expansion of a database that will ultimately be used by the Justice Department when the government decides to conduct a national confiscation of firearms similar to past confiscations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Britain. Democrats will now try to marginalize Coburn and find a Republican “partner” to collude with them against the Second Amendment. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 14, 2013, 01:28:43 pm Quote the establishment media has rolled out a number of public survey polls claiming Americans overwhelmingly approve of registering nearly all firearms under a universal background check scheme. Yeah, the "establishment media" tends to dump false polls on the public claiming it's what the public wants. Poll results or not, government is going to give the public what Washington wants, regardless of what the public wants. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2013, 06:29:58 pm http://news.yahoo.com/hampshire-lawmakers-reject-bill-allow-guns-schools-193016922.html
3/14/13 New Hampshire lawmakers reject bill to allow guns in schools CONCORD, New Hampshire (Reuters) - A bill that would have required New Hampshire school districts to vote on whether to allow teachers and other employees to carry concealed firearms on school property was defeated in a rare setback for the gun lobby in the New England state. Under the proposed law, individual districts would have been required to decide whether to allow school employees who are licensed to carry a concealed weapon to do so on campus. The bill had been submitted in January, weeks after a gunman armed with a semi-automatic assault rifle attacked a grammar school in Newtown, Connecticut, a brazen assault that left 26 people dead, including 20 children ages 6 and 7. In the wake of that incident, the head of the National Rifle Association lobby proposed putting armed guards in schools who would have the ability to fight off future attackers. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 15, 2013, 05:24:05 pm Well, of all of the hot button agendas out there(illegal immigration reform, gay marriage, etc) - it seems like the 2nd ammendment rights is the only one that's standing pretty firm. Yes, there's a few cracks in it, and yes a growing number of 501c3 churches across America have participated in gun buy-back programs, and yes even various corporations like Wal-Mart have worked arm-arm recently with the anti-gun rights lobby, etc, etc, but nonetheless I am surprised by how firm gun rights groups(except for the NRA) as a whole have stood firm(and for that matter too, gun sales have been through the roof) without getting themselves into this nonsense "war of words" dogfights with the anti-gun lobby groups.
Eventually and unfortunately, even the gun rights lobby will eventually cave(as we saw recently with the pro-family groups doing so with gay marriage recently). Mat 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. http://news.yahoo.com/colo-legislature-oks-expansion-firearms-checks-215433054.html 3/15/13 Colo Legislature OKs expansion of firearms checks DENVER (AP) — A landmark expansion of background checks on firearm purchases was approved Friday by lawmakers in Colorado, a politically moderate state that was the site of last year's gruesome mass shooting at a suburban Denver movie theater. The bill previously passed the state Senate and now heads to Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper, who is expected to sign it into law within two weeks. Earlier this week, Colorado lawmakers approved a 15-round limit on ammunition magazines. It is also awaiting the expected approval of the governor. The bill passed Friday expands cases when a $10 criminal background check would be required to legally transfer a gun. Republicans have opposed the bill, calling it an undue burden on law-abiding gun owners. "We know for a fact that whatever law we pass criminals won't care," said Republican Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg. Colorado is the first state outside the East Coast to significantly ratchet back gun rights after the theater and school shootings. Colorado's gun debate was being watched closely because it's considered a swing state with both a gun-loving frontier past and an unfortunate history of mass shootings, including the 1999 Columbine High School attack. "Are going to stop all criminals from getting guns? No," said Democratic Rep. Beth McCann, a sponsor of the background checks bill. "But are we are going to put a barrier there, make it more difficult for them? Yes." The move to expand background checks would be one of the most sweeping responses by Colorado to the shootings last year in Aurora, Colo., and the elementary school in Newtown, Conn. Expanded checks have been a top priority for Hickenlooper, who called for the proposal during his State of the State address in January. Both chambers previously approved the expanded checks in slightly different forms. However, both had to agree on an identical bill before passing it to the governor, so a second round of voting was required. Democrats seemed relieved that Colorado's protracted gun-control debate was nearing an end. The GOP unsuccessfully tried some last-minute legislative maneuvers on Friday to sink the background-check measure before it was passed 19-14 by the Senate. "It won't help anything, but it makes common everyday actions among friends and neighbors something that's now illegal in the state of Colorado," argued Republican Sen. Greg Brophy, one of the GOP's lead Senate gun negotiators. Brophy tried to keep background-check talks alive by rejecting a preliminary agreement by the House and Senate to clarify the bill so gun owners can lend firearms to immediate family members without a background check. Democrats grew frustrated at GOP attempts to imagine scenarios that would trigger background-check. From 4-H members learning gun safety but needing to borrow a shotgun, to neighbors on weeklong elk-hunting trips, Republicans argued the bill would ensnare harmless gun users. Democrats insisted that existing exemptions in the bill would cover most scenarios the GOP imagined. The bill's sponsor, Senate Democratic Leader Morgan Carroll, told Republicans that Democrats had enough votes to pass the measure but extended debate to make small changes requested by Republicans. "There were many, many changes made to this bill, made in good faith," Carroll said. However, Republicans wanted so many exceptions that "we might as well repeal all background checks," she said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 19, 2013, 12:45:08 am http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-governor-sign-gun-controls-law-035421422.html
Colorado governor to sign gun controls into law 3/18/13 DENVER (AP) — Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper will sign legislation Wednesday that sets limits on ammunition magazines and expands background checks for firearms, marking a Democratic victory in a state where gun ownership is a treasured right and Second Amendment debate has played out in the wake of two mass shootings. The measures proposed are some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, and their passage comes after weeks of tense legislative battles. Republicans and gun rights supporters put up a major fight against the measures in this politically moderate state, while Democrats made them the centerpieces of a package of legislative proposals drafted in reaction to shooting rampages at a suburban Denver movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school last year. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 19, 2013, 01:18:27 pm Congress: Assault-weapons ban nixed from bill
Whither assault weapons ban: “Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on Monday that a controversial assault weapons ban will not be part of a Democratic gun bill that was expected to reach the Senate floor next month,” Politico notes. “After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor. Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.” http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/19/17371231-congress-assault-weapons-ban-nixed-from-bill?lite Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 19, 2013, 02:07:48 pm Quote Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.” See, this is a perfect example of their shenanigans. Here we have a politician that has "wrote a bill", fair enough, they can do that when needed, but knowing that the bill is questionable and controversial, the politicians conspire to deceive the public by placing said bill inside other legislation, so they can have the questionable bill "piggyback" the better bill that has more chance of being signed into law. Add to that they then have a law passed that would not have passed had it been voted on by itself, but it becomes law as part of the bill it was placed in because the better bill is what gets voted on, not any of the bills inside them. They call it "just politics", but in fact it's fraud and deceit. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 21, 2013, 11:30:01 am US VP Biden: 'For all those who said we shouldn't or couldn't ban high capacity magazines, I just ask them: think about Newtown' - @kasie
Newtown father: 'I'm really ashamed to see that Congress doesn't have the guts to...ban assault weapons' - @kasie just what is an "assault weapons" ? there is really no such thing. and nothing that was used was fully automatic. morons Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 21, 2013, 02:59:01 pm Quote just what is an "assault weapons" ? there is really no such thing. and nothing that was used was fully automatic. morons I know. It's just people that are simply brain-dead. It's tragic, but amazing to see how people can be so blind and support such ignorance and lies, when the truth of it is right there in the Constitution. We know it's the government that started using, through the media, the terms "assault rifle". In the military, an "assault team" arms themselves with a certain type rifle due to the confined spaces of urban combat, house to house stuff. Short rifle barrel so you don't keep banging it against walls when aiming inside buildings. You also want a weapon that is lightweight, so synthetic materials are used to make the stocks, etc. that's basically plastic. Lightweight, strong and resists weather, and near zero maintenance. So what is an "assault weapon"? Depends on the one using it or describing it. Some might call a hammer an assault weapon. Now, an "assault rifle"? THAT is the type civilian SWAT teams have adopted from the military for the reasons stated above. House to house is what civilian police do. They claim they are arming themselves that way to not be "outgunned" by criminals. Basically, tactically, that's true. Criminals have those type weapons for the same reasons police and military do. So criminals WILL get their guns, of any type. Regardless of unconstitutional laws and restrictions. History has proven that to be a fact in the unbelieving world. Military and police units have them. Select license holders have them. Yet they don't want civilians to have "assault rifles". Like I said, brain-dead! ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 21, 2013, 03:21:00 pm FWIW, wouldn't an aluminum bat be an "assault weapon" by their logic as well? B/c even this can cause alot of damage. For that matter too, so can a sharp knife. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 21, 2013, 03:31:17 pm Guess it's time to ban Louisville Sluggers! ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 21, 2013, 08:38:45 pm http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/21/17403948-300-gun-arsenal-seized-from-long-island-ny-home?lite=
3/21/13 300-gun arsenal seized from Long Island, NY, home An arsenal of more than 300 guns, many of them illegal, has been seized from a Long Island home around the corner from a high school, and the homeowner was arrested, authorities said Thursday. Jay Steiner, 66, was arrested in late January after an undercover Suffolk police officer visited his Centereach home. Steiner has been charged with criminal possession of a weapon and is free on bail. "Wow!" said one surprised neighbor. "That's a lot of guns. It's scary." Police were acting on a tip from a gun owner who had taken his weapon to Steiner, said Suffolk District Attorney Thomas Spota. "The guns were stored all throughout the house," said Spota, as he stood in front of a table filled with the seized weapons. In all, 85 illegal handguns and 230 rifles and shotguns were found, as well as thousands of rounds of ammunition. "He had more firepower than the detectives who arrested him," said Spota. Investigators said Steiner had once held a federal gun license, permitting him to buy and sell weapons, but it expired in 2004. Steiner maintained a business card, prosecutors said, displaying that expired license number. Several calls to Steiner's lawyer, William Eppig of West Islip, were not returned. It's unclear what the Centereach man was doing with all the guns. The guns are being examined to determine whether any have been stolen or used in crimes. Steiner had no pistol license for any of the handguns, according to Spota. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 22, 2013, 02:30:01 am Quote Police were acting on a tip from a gun owner who had taken his weapon to Steiner, Oh really? A gun owner calls the cops on a gun owner about how many guns the person has? Knowing how things are, I don't believe that. I think they found out some other way. Let the tipster come forward and admit they told on him. Just doesn't sound right. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 23, 2013, 02:53:27 pm This story is in the Top 10 Yahoo tracker now...
When I was a young boy in the 80's, I remember they ran an anti-gun ad during an after-school program on tv showing 2 young boys cracking open their dad's briefcase safe, and they find a gun. Then one of the boys pointed it at his friend like it was some toy, and accidentally shot him. Personally, my reaction at the time was of shell-shockness. Not surprising, as little did I(nor anyone else) know that these kinds of NWO ads were aimed at young kids to brainwash us to believe the 2nd amendment is evil. Anyhow - when I read this story a few minutes ago, it reminded me of this ad awhile back, and fast-forward to today over how these news items are being pushed to further promote gun control legislation. http://www.examiner.com/article/teen-accidentally-kills-brother-12-year-old-boy-dies-second-orlando-shooting Teen accidentally kills brother: 12-year-old boy dies in second Orlando shooting 3/23/13 A teen accidentally kills his brother is topping national headlines this weekend, as Fox WOGX News reported this Friday, March 22, that a 12-year-old Orlando, Fla. boy is dead after his 16-year-old brother accidentally shot him with a gun. Under the headline, “Teen accidentally kills brother, police say”, the Orlando Sentinel adds that although the boy was quickly taken to Arnold Palmer Hospital, he was unable to be revived and was pronounced dead from the gunshot wound. Local officials have deemed that the brother’s shooting was an accident, and the older teen is not expected to face any charges in the boy’s death. “ "Detectives will be meeting at a later date with the State Attorneys Office to discuss the case and decide if there is any negligence," said Orlando Police Department spokesman Sgt. Jim Young. "The family is fully cooperating with the investigation; however, they are requesting privacy." Unfortunately, this is not the first time that gun violence in the Orlando area has tragically struck youth this week. Fox News added that a Pine Hills boy, only four years old, is still in critical condition after he found a loaded gun and shot himself in the head this Wednesday morning. Police are still investigating how the child came in contact with the gun. This disturbing news only seems to highlight the importance of keeping guns away from both the very young and teens to keep them safe from such accidents. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 23, 2013, 10:05:23 pm http://news.yahoo.com/bloomberg-mayor-group-tout-big-gun-control-push-004838083--politics.html
Bloomberg, mayor group tout big gun control push 3/23/13 NEW YORK (AP) — A new $12 million television ad campaign from Mayors Against Illegal Guns will push senators in key states to back gun control efforts, including comprehensive background checks. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced the ad buy Saturday — just days after Senate Democrats touted stronger background checks while acknowledging insufficient support to restore a ban on assault-style weapons to federal gun control legislation. "These ads bring the voices of Americans — who overwhelmingly support comprehensive and enforceable background checks — into the discussion to move senators to immediately take action to prevent gun violence," Bloomberg said in a statement issued by the group he co-founded in 2006. The two ads posted on the group's website, called "Responsible" and "Family," show a gun owner holding a rifle while sitting on the back of a pickup truck. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 24, 2013, 05:07:54 am And just who is paying that 12 million? And who told the mayors to form a group and protest stuff as a group? The public is suppose to tell politicians what is needed. Politicians don't get to "form groups" and make policy outside the voting booth.
Bloomberg is one of the biggest enemies of the state there is. Stone-cold socialist/globalist dirt bag. It's this kind of stuff that really gets me angry. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 25, 2013, 09:30:11 pm http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/289971-mccain-emerges-as-key-republican-in-expanding-background-checks-
3/24/13 McCain emerges as key senator in expanding background checks Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has emerged as a key player if Senate Democrats are to have any chance of passing legislation to expand background checks for private sales of firearms. McCain and Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.) are at the top of a list of Republicans considered most likely to sign on to legislation expanding background checks after talks with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) stalled earlier this month. Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) has signaled he will likely support the yet-to-be-finalized proposal he negotiated with Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to expand background checks to cover private gun sales, according to Senate sources. The proposal includes modifications to attract Republican support. One would let rural gun owners conduct background checks from their home computers. Another would create an appeals process for military veterans who have been declared mentally unfit to own a gun. Expanding background checks is the centerpiece of President Obama’s proposal to change the nation’s gun laws in response to the mass shooting that killed 20 children in Newtown, Conn., last December. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 27, 2013, 11:01:14 pm http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-assault-rifle-purchase-giffords-husband-triggers-outcry-191450646.html
3/27/13 Arizona assault rifle purchase by Giffords' husband triggers outcry PHOENIX (Reuters) - The husband of Gabrielle Giffords, who with his wife is a top campaigner for curbs to military-style weapon ownership, has drawn criticism for buying an assault rifle in Arizona, a purchase he said meant to highlight the need for gun control. Former astronaut Mark Kelly, who with Giffords founded a new lobbying group this year to curb gun violence, said it took only "a matter of minutes" to complete the background check for the AR-15 assault weapon he purchased at a gun shop in Tucson. "Scary to think of people buying guns like these without a background check at a gun show or the Internet," he wrote in a posting on his Facebook account. "We really need to close the gun show and private seller loop hole." News of his purchase was quickly met with stinging rebukes from gun rights supporters on social media, who called Kelly a hypocrite for buying the gun in the first place. "What a two faced coward you are Kelly - it's ok for you to own one and protect your family but not the rest of us?" one Facebook poster wrote. The group founded by Kelly and Giffords, Americans for Responsible Solutions, is pushing for a ban on high-powered semiautomatic weapons like the AR-15 rifle that he bought, as well as high-capacity magazines. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on March 28, 2013, 03:47:13 am Quote he wrote in a posting on his Facebook account. "We really need to close the gun show and private seller loop hole." No Mark, you need to mind your own constitutional business. You don't like Arizona gun laws, move! ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 29, 2013, 12:10:11 pm http://tv.yahoo.com/news/conservatives-offer-jim-carrey-memorabilia-gun-money-ebay-133900098.html
Conservatives Offer Jim Carrey Memorabilia for Gun Money on eBay -- Did the Website Put a Stop To It 3/29/13 Jim Carrey's recent anti-gun Funny or Die video sparked outrage from conservatives, prompting one eBay user to sell paraphernalia of the star with the purpose of buying a gun with the proceeds. According to The Hollywood Reporter, eBay user astrobuzz listed an item titled "Jim Carrey Autographed 8X10 Photo So I Can Afford a Gun!" in response to Carrey's video. The black-and-white autographed reprint of Carrey also had the inscription, "Spank you very much!" The Hollywood Reporter notes that while identical items sell for only $8 and attract few bids, astrobuzz's listing generated 103 bidders, raising the price up to $860 by Wednesday afternoon. Late Wednesday night, all references to guns were purged from the item's description and the bids disappeared. "I'm selling this Jim Carrey autographed B&W photo (mint condition) for purposes I cannot explain because it might be against eBay's Terms & Conditions," the new description read. Astrobuzz's original post spawned copycats, including eBayers who said that they would use the money to join the NRA or pursue classes and apply for a concealed-carry permit. But as of late Wednesday, the word "gun" was removed from all Carrey memorabilia on eBay. eBay has not yet publicly addressed the issue. Do you think eBay stopped the trend? Title: Franklin Graham, Richard Land Support Background Checks for Gun Purchases Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 01, 2013, 12:05:46 pm Franklin Graham, SBC leader Richard Land Support Background Checks for Gun Purchases
3/13/13 Major evangelical leaders recently announced their support for universal background checks for all firearms purchases in America. The Rev. Franklin Graham, president of the Christian relief organization Samaritan's Purse and Dr. Richard Land, outgoing head of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, stated this in interviews with Time Magazine. "As ministers, we agreed together that we could stand on a united front for universal background checks … We think that's reasonable and responsible," said Graham. "There are millions of people that we can mobilize behind something like this, but it takes leadership from the White House." "We're not going to oppose universal background checks – it's a nice idea but only law-abiding citizens follow that," said Land. "The more the president can make this a multi-pronged [effort] the more support he's going to receive from evangelicals." Both evangelical leaders agreed that in addition to background checks other efforts, such as holding the entertainment industry accountable for violent content and reforming the mental health care, are needed. The remarks of Graham and Land come as the Washington National Cathedral is preparing for a series of events meant to spread awareness about the cost of gun violence. Titled "National Gun Violence Sabbath," the events will take place March 14-17 and will be live streamed on the National Cathedral's website. According to a February statement from the National Cathedral, the event is organized with the support of the group Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence. "This is a critical moment in the life of our nation. The faith community has seen the tragic results of inaction, and we cannot stand by any longer," said the Rev. Gary Hall, dean of the cathedral, in a statement. "No one should be at risk from gun violence in a schoolroom, in the workplace, on our city streets, at a shopping mall, a movie theater – or anywhere else. This weekend of programs offers time to reflect, unite, and act to curb the epidemic of gun violence in our midst." While the background checks proposal gains support from both ends of the Christian theological spectrum, the idea still has its critics. Wayne LaPierre, CEO for the National Rifle Association, spoke at the Western Hunting & Conservation Expo in Salt Lake City, Utah, and called universal background checks "the heart of [the] anti-gun agenda." "This is not universal background checks. This is universal registration of your firearms. Imagine right now your name on a massive government list," said LaPierre. "How safe do you think that government list will be? Think it's secure? Well, WikiLeaks had no trouble tapping into secret government computers. China hacked into Pentagon computers." Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/franklin-graham-richard-land-support-background-checks-for-gun-purchases-91790/#5g71lTSvPW2y3Ma6.99 Title: Re: Franklin Graham, Richard Land Support Background Checks for Gun Purchases Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 01, 2013, 01:23:37 pm Also was reading another article today over how Hitler's/N@zi Germany's agendas were implemented(ie-gun confiscation) largely b/c of the ORGANIZED CHURCH SYSTEM there that helped him. Probably why we should not marvel now over so-called "evangelical" leaders emerging as the bigger mouthpieces in this gun control movement as well.
After a half a century over the organized church system getting tax benefits, looks like Caesar is calling in his chips now. Judgment must begin at the house of the Lord... Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 01, 2013, 08:58:21 pm http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/01/17557867-connecticut-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-most-comprehensive-gun-limits-in-us?lite&
4/1/13 Connecticut lawmakers reach deal on 'most comprehensive' gun limits in US Connecticut lawmakers on Monday said they had reached an agreement on compromise gun control legislation that they said would be one of the toughest in the nation, 3½ months after 20 children and six other people were killed in a mass shooting at an elementary school. The bill includes a ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines like those Adam Lanza used to fire 154 shots in four 4 minutes Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, a new registry for existing high-capacity magazines and background checks for private gun sales, NBC Connecticut reported. While the measure would ban the sale of ammunition magazines able to handle more than 10 bullets, Gov. Dannell Malloy and parents of the Sandy Hook victims objected to a "grandfather clause" that will allow current owners of such magazines to keep them. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 02, 2013, 06:45:29 am Connecticut passes sweeping gun laws...
http://www.boston.com/news/education/2013/04/01/conn-proposals-guns-other-items-after-newtown/0Qn1nJQI3223inrmQWfMFI/story.html State decides who can buy guns, ammunition... http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/04/01/connecticut-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-gun-control-laws/ More than 100 weapon types banned... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21997806 GA town passes law requiring residents to own guns... http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/02/us-usa-georgia-guns-idUSBRE93102820130402 'Armed Citizen Project' may expand to Dallas... http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/04/01/free-guns-for-high-crime-neighborhoods/ NEED AMMO? WHERE'S YOUR ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATE? With an announcement of sweeping proposals to curb gun violence, Connecticut lawmakers said they are hoping to send a message to Congress and other state legislators across the country: A bipartisan agreement on gun control is possible. Legislative leaders on Monday revealed proposals spurred by the Dec. 14 Newtown school shooting following weeks of bipartisan, closed-door negotiations. A vote is expected Wednesday in the General Assembly, where Democrats control both chambers, making passage all but assured. "Democrats and Republicans were able to come to an agreement on a strong, comprehensive bill," said Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., a Democrat from Brooklyn, who called the proposed legislation the strongest, most comprehensive bill in the country. "That is a message that should resound in 49 other states and in Washington, D.C. And the message is: We can get it done here and they should get it done in their respective states and nationally in Congress." The massacre reignited the gun debate in the country and led to calls for increased gun control legislation on the federal and state levels. While some other states, including neighboring New York, have strengthened their gun laws, momentum has stalled in Congress, whose members were urged by President Barack Obama last week not to forget the shooting and to capitalize on the best chance in years to stem gun violence. The Connecticut deal includes a ban on new high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School that left 20 children and six educators dead. There are also new registration requirements for existing magazines that carry 10 or more bullets, something of a disappointment for some family members of Newtown victims who wanted an outright ban on the possession of all high-capacity magazines and traveled to the state Capitol on Monday to ask lawmakers for it. The package also creates what lawmakers said is the nation's first statewide dangerous weapon offender registry, creates a new "ammunition eligibility certificate," imposes immediate universal background checks for all firearms sales, and extends the state's assault weapons ban to 100 new types of firearms and requires that a weapon have only one of several features in order to be banned. The newly banned weapons could no longer be bought or sold in Connecticut, and those legally owned already would have to be registered with the state, just like the high-capacity magazines. Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, a Fairfield Republican whose district includes Newtown, said Republicans and Democrats have understood they needed to "rise above politics" when they decided to come up with a legislative response to the massacre. "At the end of the day, I think it's a package that the majority of the people of Connecticut I know will be proud of," he said. The bill also addresses mental health and school security measures, including gun restrictions for people who've been committed to mental health facilities and restoration of a state grant for school safety improvements. After clearing the state legislature, the bill would be sent to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has helped lead efforts to strengthen the state's gun laws but has not yet signed off on the proposed legislation. Earlier Monday, Malloy voiced support for the Newtown families and their desire to ban the possession of large-capacity magazines. Ron Pinciaro, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence, said his group will live with the lawmakers' decision not to ban them as other states have done. He said the leaders made their decision based on what was politically feasible. "We have to be satisfied. There are still other things that we want, we'll be back for in later sessions," he said. "But for now, it's a good thing." Robert Crook, executive director of the Connecticut Coalition of Sportsmen, contended the bill would not have changed what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where gunman Adam Lanza fired off 154 shots with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle within five minutes. He went through six 30-round magazines, though half were not completely empty, and police said he had three other 30-round magazines in addition to one in the rifle. "They can register magazines and do all the rest of this stuff. It isn't going to do anything," he said. Gun owners, who've packed public hearings at the state Capitol in recent months, voicing their opposition to various gun control measures, are concerned they've been showing up "for virtually nothing" after learning about the bill, Crook said. Six relatives of Newtown victims visited the Capitol on Monday, asking lawmakers to ban existing high-capacity magazines. Some handed out cards with photographs of their slain children. Allowing magazines that carry 10 or more bullets to remain in the hands of gun owners would leave a gaping loophole in the law, said Mark Barden, whose 7-year-old son, Daniel, was killed in the shooting. "It doesn't prevent someone from going out of the state to purchase them and then bring them back. There's no way to track when they were purchased, so they can say, 'I had this before,'" Barden said. "So it's a big loophole." Barden and other victims' family members who visited the statehouse on Monday did not immediately respond to messages seeking their reactions to the agreement. Jake McGuigan, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which is based in Newtown, said he wouldn't comment on the proposal until he saw it in the writing, but he questioned the mechanics of a registry for magazines. "How will they register a magazine? It seems a little weird," he said. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130402/DA5D80EG2.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 02, 2013, 08:50:28 am We will see where all of this goes - right under everyone's noses, they are pushing universal background checks, meaning everyone who buys a gun will have to register in the nation's database(or something like that).
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 03, 2013, 11:20:32 pm http://www.infowars.com/sen-grassley-and-republicans-plan-to-work-with-democrats-on-legislatgion-attacking-2nd-amendment/
Sen. Grassley and Republicans Plan to Work With Democrats On Legislation Attacking 2nd Amendment 3/31/13 Despite a plan by Republican senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee to derail and defeat S. 649, the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013, Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley is preparing work with Democrats in their war on the Second Amendment next month. According to pro-Second Amendment websites, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has indicated he may support “gun control lite” legislation. “You would think ALL Republicans are lining up behind Senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee to support the filibuster of Harry Reid’s gun control bill — S. 649,” writes AmmoLand today. “But that’s just not happening.” Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Harry Reid, are looking to find Republicans they can deal with after Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn refused to collude with them on anti-Second Amendment legislation. “If Reid manages to pick up the support of enough Senate Republicans, Obama will get what he wants — fictitious ‘gun trafficking’ legislation, so-called ‘mental health screenings’ and ‘expanded background checks,’” AmmoLand reports. “Possibly even more gun control like Feinstein’s so-called ‘assault weapons ban’ and a federal magazine ban will also be on the table.” Grassley is the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. If he supports “gun control lite” many junior senators will find it more difficult to oppose legislation aimed at the heart of the Second Amendment. In 2009, Grassley cut a deal with Democrats on Obama’s socialist healthcare takeover. He was the top Republican negotiator in the “Gang of Six,” a group of Senate Finance Committee members negotiating with Democrats on Obamacare. “Senator Chuck Grassley and Mitch McConnell’s history of ‘deal-cutting’ should be so worrisome to gun owners,” AmmoLand explains. “I don’t have to go back far to remind you that Mitch McConnell has a history of caving in to the demands of Obama and Harry Reid.” McConnell has worked closely with Senate Democrats in the past, most recently on the so-called “fiscal cliff” deal that gave Obama and Reid $41 in tax increases in exchange for $1 in spending cuts. “Our political insiders are telling us that Grassley is hoping to draft a proposal that would drastically expand the scope of the mental health laws – leaving thousands of Iowans vulnerable to losing their gun rights on the whim on any ‘mental health professional,’” Iowa Gun Owners warned on Friday. As we noted in February, the federal government has stepped up its effort to strip veterans of their firearms by issuing determinations of mental incompetency. “S. 649 already contains the Veterans Gun Ban, which could send you to prison for 15 years for selling, raffling or gifting a firearm in America, while not realizing that the recipient was disqualified in some way – say, for being a military veteran with PTSD or for being a habitual user of marijuana (for medical purposes),” Gun Owners of America warned in a recent Action Alert. The Paul-Cruz-Lee filibuster of a motion to proceed with legislation on the Senate floor is currently the only viable opposition to the effort by Obama and Democrats in Congress to deny Americans their rights under the Constitution. “By filibustering — opposing the motion to proceed on S. 649 –- Paul, Cruz and Lee can hold the line against gun control for the moment,” explains AmmoLand. “And if they hold the filibuster and prevent Reid from getting the 60 votes he needs to break it, gun owners win the first battle in the Obama administration’s war on gun owners.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 03, 2013, 11:25:15 pm Quote “By filibustering — opposing the motion to proceed on S. 649 –- Paul, Cruz and Lee can hold the line against gun control for the moment,” explains AmmoLand. “And if they hold the filibuster and prevent Reid from getting the 60 votes he needs to break it, gun owners win the first battle in the Obama administration’s war on gun owners.” Being from TX, I know a bit about Ted Cruz - newly elected Tea Party Jr. Senator, that "won" largely b/c his main GOP rival Dewhurst was branded as a "moderate", and some former football player-turned ESPN analyst(Craig James) was thrown into the mix to help split the votes somewhat. IOW, he's just another fresh face playing the role of "good cop" to give the self-professing "conservatives" and "patriots" a voice...nothing more, nothing less. Rand Paul - endorsed Romney for President last year. Need we say more? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 04, 2013, 05:37:23 am Quote And if they hold the filibuster and prevent Reid from getting the 60 votes he needs I wouldn't give Harry Reid anything but a plane ticket out of the country and a revocation of his citizenship. The thug is a stone-cold traitor that should be in jail. Title: OBAMA LIES TO HELP PUSH GUN CONTROL!!! Post by: Mark on April 04, 2013, 02:26:27 pm OBAMA LIES TO HELP PUSH GUN CONTROL!!!
Obama: Newtown Shooter Gunned Down 20 Children With 'Fully Automatic Weapon' At a fundraiser last night in San Francisco, President Barack Obama said that the Newtown killer gunned down 20 children using a "fully automatic weapon." From the official transcript, provided by the White House: Now, over the next couple of months, we’ve got a couple of issues: gun control. (Applause.) I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon -- by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly. According to the prosecutor, Stephen J. Sedensky III, the killer, Adam Lanza, "killed all 26 victims inside Sandy Hook Elementary School with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle before taking his own life with a Glock 10 mm handgun. He says Lanza had another loaded handgun with him inside the school as well as three, 30-round magazines for the Bushmaster," ABC previously reported. Each of the guns used is a semi-automatic weapon, and not one is an automatic weapon. So either Obama is wrong--or he revealed something last night about the massacre that hasn't yet been known. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-newtown-shooter-gunned-down-20-children-fully-automatic-weapon_714527.html he flat out told a LIE is what he did Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 04, 2013, 03:55:59 pm Even worse, it looks like Obama isn't going anywhere(at least for awhile) - don't expect any kind of "impeachment" proceedings on him either(unless he decides to cross the lines against his puppetmasters, that is).
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 04, 2013, 03:56:54 pm Mayor Against Illegal Guns Busted For Demanding Gay Sex At Gunpoint
Another hypocrite politician, a member of Mayor Bloomberg's 'Mayors Against Illegal Guns' group, has been busted for demanding drunken gay sex at gunpoint from a young man who looked to Mayor James Schiliro of Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania as a 'father figure'. Schiliro has since been dropped from Mayor Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns group, whose slogan is "The time has come to Demand Action." I have to wonder if they meant that so literally? Will Mayor Bloomberg soon announce a new group for mayors, “Mayors Against Mayors Using Illegal Guns to Demand Gay Sex"? Screenshot below from Mayor Bloombergs Mayors Against Illegal Guns website with much more below. Think that this couldn't get any more despicable? We have only just begun. After having a Marcus Hook police officer 'deliver' the 20-year old victim to the mayor's home, the following took place according to court documents.: “Schiliro asked the victim if (Schiliro) could perform oral sex on the (20-year-old.) Schiliro made the request repeatedly … 20 to 30 times throughout the time the victim was at the residence,” the affidavit states. Schiliro “became very distraught” after the young man refused his requests, the affidavit states. During the encounter, Schiliro produced three different handguns, each time waving it around recklessly inside the house. Schiliro discharged one of the firearms into some papers on the floor in a room at the rear of the house. The 20-year-old told authorities that Schiliro described him as a hostage, and directed his movements by pointing the handgun at various places within the residence, according to the affidavit. Part of the county investigation included a search of Schiliro’s home, conducted on March 7. Among the items recovered was a bullet from a wall inside the house. The 9 mm projectile was later determined to have been fired from one of eight firearms that Schiliro sold on Feb. 23, the morning after the encounter. rest+ Vids: http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/04/mayor-against-illegal-guns-busted-for-demanding-gay-sex-at-gunpoint-2506168.html Title: Re: OBAMA LIES TO HELP PUSH GUN CONTROL!!! Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 04, 2013, 11:16:27 pm Obama: Newtown Shooter Gunned Down 20 Children With 'Fully Automatic Weapon' http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-newtown-shooter-gunned-down-20-children-fully-automatic-weapon_714527.html I'm not saying this is propaganda or anything, but I tried to cross-check this story on the Yahoo search engine, and the only other news sites that reported this were nothing more than SECONDARY sites(which are primarily internet and nothing more), and they themselves CREDITED the Weekly Standard for this. Again, I'm not saying Obama didn't say this comment, but at the same time even the Obama-worshipping MSM would have picked up on this comment and ran away with it too b/c they themselves have been heavily pushing gun control on the public. Results on Yahoo - other news sources don't seem to verify the Weekly Standard's. http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AmBNm.WN_.jsPK.VHBiRFwqbvZx4?p=Obama%3A+Newtown+Shooter+Gunned+Down+20+Children+With+%27Fully+Automatic+Weapon%27&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-900 2Cor_13:1 This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Boldhunter on April 05, 2013, 12:35:43 am I truly see a huge deception going on... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5bUACrMRe8&feature=youtube_gdata_player Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 05, 2013, 03:57:31 am Yeah, and the actor angle ain't it. Just silly conspiracy theory junk that's right at home over at PPF. They are pushing it hard at Prison Planet. This kind of stuff makes the so-called "truth movement" look stupid, as intended. Lets not go there shall we?
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 05, 2013, 12:12:51 pm Well, I'm rather surprised "red" states like Mississippi and Wyoming have enacted more laws tightening gun restrictions, on the contrary. But nonetheless, we'll see where all of this goes...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/despite-gun-control-push-more-states-cut-back-135854909--election.html 4/4/13 Despite gun-control push, more states have cut back on gun regulations since Newtown Despite a major push from the White House, more states have cut back on gun regulations rather than pass gun-control reforms in the wake of the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday. Five states—New York, Colorado, Mississippi, Utah and Wyoming—have enacted seven new laws tightening restrictions on guns since Dec. 14, when a gunman shot 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School before turning the weapon on himself. A sixth state, Connecticut, passed the toughest gun laws in the nation this week, banning some types of semi-automatic weapons and requiring all gun buyers to undergo background checks before purchases. (Gov. Dan Malloy is expected to sign the bill into law on Thursday.) Meanwhile, legislators in 10 states pushed through 17 new laws that broaden gun rights. One such law, in Arkansas, allows staff and faculty to carry concealed weapons on university campuses. Utah lawmakers, meanwhile, passed a law to allow people prohibited from buying weapons for mental health reasons to petition the state to be able to purchase a gun. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 06, 2013, 12:53:27 pm Yesterday at the TX Rangers home opener here in North Texas, Robbie Parker and his family attended the game b/c he threw out the first ceremonial opening pitch.
While my heart and sympathy goes out to the victims of the Newtown shootings, NONE of these victims's families should be going around to baseball games nor any other entertainment events glamourizing themselves like this. It's as if the globalist thugs are finding more subtle ways to push gun control on the public. http://news.yahoo.com/rangers-fan-honors-daughter-killed-massacre-211226140--mlb.html Rangers fan honors daughter killed in massacre 4/5/13 (http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/DoZ_inu2saqxboiLaplvYw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MTk5MDtjcj0xO2N3PTIwMDA7ZHg9MDtkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTQ3MjtxPTg1O3c9NDc1/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/c6c0d77c7b88330b2e0f6a706700afcb.jpg) ARLINGTON, Texas (AP) — Longtime Texas Rangers fan Robbie Parker grabbed former star catcher Ivan Rodriguez in a long embrace and didn't seem to want to let go. A few months ago, Parker never would have imagined crying on the shoulder of one of his boyhood heroes. But a lot has happened since December and here he was, throwing out the ceremonial first pitch in honor of his 6-year-old daughter, Emilie, who was among the 26 killed in the mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn. So when Parker tossed the ball all the way to the 14-time All-Star's glove — he'd spent the last few weeks worrying about making a good throw — he held on tight when he and Rodriguez met halfway between the mound and home plate, his wife and two daughters watching nearby and thousands standing and cheering at sold-out Rangers Ballpark in Arlington on Friday. "It was really tough to try to keep my emotions under control there," Parker said a few minutes later, still fighting back tears. "It was pretty amazing." more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 07, 2013, 02:30:06 am Quote NONE of these victim's families should be going around to baseball games nor any other entertainment events glamourizing themselves like this Agreed, but that's how they roll. Work it for all it's worth. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on April 07, 2013, 04:24:36 pm I truly see a huge deception going on... Don’t know about hired actors per se, but there certainly has been a fair share of alleged victims of a major event caught LYING about it. Have a look at some of the 9/11 anomalies that have come out. That I can believe. It’s fallen human nature. Gets me wondering about wheat and tares. Quote Inside Tania Head’s Terrible 9/11 Lie: ‘The Woman Who Wasn’t There’ Apr 6, 2012 3:50 PM EDT Tania Head surfaced after 9/11 with an astonishing tale of survival and loss. Her story of barely escaping death in the south tower, and losing her husband, Dave, in the north tower, inspired everyone who heard it. She cultivated friendships with fellow survivors and became president of the influential World Trade Center Survivors’ Network. But she had a secret that, when it was finally revealed seven years later, would stun and crush the courageous people whom she claimed to champion. In this excerpt from Robin Gaby Fisher and Angelo J. Guglielmo, Jr.’s new book The Woman Who Wasn’t There, the authors chronicle the months and days before her lie unraveled. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/06/inside-tania-head-s-terrible-9-11-lie-the-woman-who-wasn-t-there.html Quote Nearly 3,000 victims of 9/11 don’t show up as dead in Social Security records · By Thomas Hargrove of Scripps Howard News Service · Posted July 9, 2011 at noon WASHINGTON — A New York congresswoman who represents Manhattan wants answers to why nearly 3,000 victims of the 9/11 terrorists attacks weren’t reported in the Social Security Administration’s official list of deceased Americans. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., said her staff started making inquiries after the errors in the federal Death Master File (DMF) were detected by Scripps Howard News Service. The file is a public record intended to protect families of the deceased from identity theft and other types of fraud. “While nearly 3,000 individuals were killed on Sept. 11th, the list does not show an increase in numbers from the typical DMF daily average,” Maloney said. “A sampling of those names did not yield any matches in the DMF and confirms their apparent absence.” She said her staff has contacted the Social Security Administration, the New York State Department of Health and the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, only to receive “conflicting answers as to why there is a lack of reporting on this matter.” http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/jul/09/Social-Security-Administration-grave-mistakes-911/ Quote Phony 9/11 Deaths As estimates of the death toll rose in the days following the 9/11 attacks, enormous amounts of sympathy and media attention flowed out towards those who had lost loved ones in the attack. Those who had participated in rescue efforts were hailed as national heroes. But simultaneously, many people (motivated, perhaps, by a desire for sympathy or attention) fabricated tales of phony heroics and lost loved ones in the weeks and months following 9/11. Listed are a few of the more notable cases of these phony 9/11 tales: · Maureen Curry of Vancouver, Canada reported that her daughter, Carolyn Burdz, had been killed in the attack. She also complained that her employer had refused her request for bereavement leave. Friends and sympathetic politicians quickly raised over $2000 for her. But in reality her daughter was alive and well and living in Winnipeg. The two had been estranged for years. · Susan Arroyo of Tennessee lied about the 9/11 death of her sister. She later explained that she did so in order to help re-establish ties with her brother (seems like a roundabout way to make peace with your brother... but never mind). · The 9/11 death of a member of an internet gaming community was announced online to the other players. The prankster behind the false announcement turned out to be the player himself. · Cyril Kendall claimed that his son Wilfred died in the attacks on the World Trade Center, for which he received $160,000 in compensation from the Red Cross. One problem. He didn't have a son named Wilfred. But he did manage to buy a shiny new car with the Red Cross money to help assuage his grief over the death of his nonexistent son. He was later sentenced to 11 to 33 years in prison. · A member of the online LiveJournal community who went under the name Flashman, but whose real name was supposedly Anthony Joseph Pereira, was said to have died rushing into one of the burning World Trade Center towers in an attempt to save people. A friend of his, Rhyein, posted the announcement of his death, sparking an outpouring of online grief and commiseration. In fact, Flashman had never died, because he had never existed to begin with. He was the fictitious creation of Rhyein, the woman who had posted the announcement of his death. She chose the name 'Anthony Joseph Pereira' because it was the original name of Joe Perry of Aerosmith, her favorite band. · Daniel McCarthy told people at a resort casino in Lake Tahoe where he was getting married that he was an ex-NYC policeman who had been trapped in the rubble of the World Trade Center for 79 hours after he tried to carry a pregnant woman on his back out of the building. He said his partner, Dominick Impertore, died at his side. The NYC Police denied he had ever been employed by them. · Sanae Zahani, a 20-year-old woman from Morocco, gained national attention for the search for her sister who, so she said, had been working in a bond-trading firm inside the World Trade Center. She even told her story on the Rosie O'Donnell show. But Zahani never had a sister who lived in New York. Zahani disappeared when this awkward flaw in her story was discovered. http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/permalink/phony_9_11_deaths/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: tennis shoe on April 07, 2013, 04:36:01 pm Quote NONE of these victim's families should be going around to baseball games nor any other entertainment events glamourizing themselves like this Here’s another example of that. Quote Bruins to Visit Newtown, CT February 18; Honor Natalie Green Hammond March 3 Friday, 02.15.2013 / 4:25 PM / News Boston Bruins BOSTON, MA – The Boston Bruins will visit Newtown, CT on Monday to conduct a variety of events, with the assistance of the United Way of Western Connecticut. The visit will feature current Bruins Chris Bourque, Andrew Ference, Dougie Hamilton, Aaron Johnson, Adam McQuaid, Daniel Paille, Rich Peverley, as well as Head Coach Claude Julien. The players will be taking pictures, signing autographs and spending time with the hundreds of families in attendance from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Along with the player appearances, Boston Bruins Alumni Bob Sweeney and Tommy Songin will be in attendance to help conduct Street Hockey Clinics. The Bruins Youth Hockey Development team will host an hour-long clinic with Newtown High School’s varsity hockey team. Bruins staff will be giving out framed team-autographed jerseys to Newtown first responders, and the Stanley Cup is expected to make an appearance. All 1,300 attendees will receive a t-shirt bearing both a Bruins logo and the Sandy Hook green ribbon, donated by Delaware North Companies. In addition to the activities in Newtown on Monday, the Bruins will honor Sandy Hook Elementary School Vice Principal Natalie Green Hammond at their game against the Montreal Canadiens on Sunday, March 3 at the TD Garden. Green Hammond, a lifelong Bruins fan, will drop the ceremonial first puck. http://bruins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=655847 Hammond was shot in the foot and survived. Two months later, she’s featured at a professional hockey game. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 07, 2013, 04:56:27 pm http://news.yahoo.com/don-t-understand-mccain-blasts-gop-threat-filibuster-194023898.html
‘I Don’t Understand It’: McCain Blasts GOP Threat to Filibuster Gun Bill 4/7/13 Sen. John McCain on Sunday once again found himself at odds with Republican colleagues Rand Paul and Ted Cruz when he slammed their intention to filibuster any gun legislation. "I don't understand it," the Arizona Republican said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "The purpose of the United States Senate is to debate and to vote and to let the people know where we stand." A number of GOP senators, including Paul (Ky.), Cruz (Texas), Mike Lee of Utah and Marco Rubio of Florida, signed a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) vowing to filibuster any gun bills. "I don't understand it," McCain repeated. "What are we afraid of?...If this issue is as important as all of us think it is...why not take it up and debate?" He added that "everybody wants the same goal, to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally disabled." more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 08, 2013, 02:37:49 pm http://news.yahoo.com/shop-sold-gun-newtown-mom-loses-license-124638882.html
Shop that sold gun to Newtown mom loses license 4/5/13 NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — A shop that sold a gun to the Newtown school shooter's mother has lost its federal firearms license. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor in December. The agency, which confirmed the revocation to reporters Thursday, didn't say why. Authorities raided the store for undisclosed reasons shortly after the December school shootings in which Adam Lanza killed 20 first-graders and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He also shot to death his mother, Nancy, at their home. Authorities say he fired 154 shots with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle inside the school, then killed himself with a Glock handgun. Nancy Lanza purchased a Bushmaster from Riverview, according to a person close to the investigation into the school shooting who spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe is continuing. It could not be confirmed whether the Bushmaster was the one used in the shooting. Shop owner David LaGuercia said in December that Nancy Lanza bought a gun from him years ago, but he couldn't remember what kind. LaGuercia said at the time he was cooperating with law enforcement. "There is nothing more devastating than the loss of a child," LaGuercia said in a statement in December. "We are absolutely appalled that the product that we sold several years ago would be used in this type of horrendous crime. Our hearts go out to the victims and the families." His wife, Shelley Clemens, said Friday that she and her husband still don't know why the ATF revoked his firearms license. She said the store remains open selling ammunition and other items that aren't firearms while LaGuercia appeals the revocation. "They just came in the store after Sandy Hook, raided the store and took away the license," she said, referring further questions to her husband. LaGuercia, of Agawam, Mass., didn't return phone messages Friday. ATF officials said federal firearms license holders receive a copy of the violations report before a revocation is initiated and are made aware of the violations again during the hearing process. They have 60 days to appeal and in this case they chose not to do so, officials said. The weapons used in the shooting had all apparently been purchased by Nancy Lanza, prosecutor Stephen J. Sedensky III said last week when search warrants were unsealed showing the Lanzas' home was packed with weapons and ammunition. Clemens said in December that store records show one gun was sold to Lanza. Riverview Gun Sales is about 15 miles north of Hartford and about 65 miles northeast of Newtown. In December, its website described it as a place that sold a variety of rifles and pistols, including Bushmaster and Glock, but on Friday, the website's links to specific guns indicated they were not available. The shop also sold high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones authorities say were used by Adam Lanza. In a law passed this week, Connecticut banned the sale or purchase of magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 09, 2013, 02:51:23 pm http://news.yahoo.com/two-senators-key-obamas-push-broader-checks-gun-003114309.html
Senate to cast first gun-control votes on Thursday 4/9/13 By Richard Cowan and John Whitesides WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate will cast its first vote on President Barack Obama's gun-control proposals on Thursday, but Democratic Leader Harry Reid said he was unsure if the bill could gain the 60 votes it needs to overcome Republican procedural hurdles. Reid called on Republicans to drop their attempt to block debate on the gun legislation, but Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said there was no bipartisan support for the effort. Obama's proposals to expand background checks for gun buyers and ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines were sparked by the December massacre of 20 children and six adults at a school in Newtown, Connecticut. The administration has struggled to gain support for gun legislation in Congress in the face of intense opposition from the National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby. To push the case for action to curb gun violence, some families of the Newtown victims were brought in from Connecticut on Air Force One to lobby Republican and Democratic senators on Capitol Hill this week. Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania are trying to hammer out a compromise on background checks, which appears to be Obama's best hope for meaningful legislation, but Reid said he would not wait to see if they could reach a deal. "We're moving forward on this bill. The American people deserve a vote on this legislation," Reid told reporters after a lunch meeting with his fellow Democrats to discuss strategy. He said he hoped for an agreement in the meantime on background checks that would be offered as an amendment to the base bill, which was passed by the Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote. McConnell said he and his fellow conservatives would press ahead with the filibuster. "The one (Reid) indicated he was going to try to move to clearly has no bipartisan support," McConnell said. Another centerpiece of Obama's efforts, the renewal of a ban on the sale of military-style assault weapons, appears headed to defeat, and a proposed 10-bullet limit on ammunition magazines also looks to be in trouble. Obama, who has called the day of the Newtown massacre the worst of his presidency, traveled to Connecticut on Monday to appeal for action in Congress. But a Senate aide said there is strong, bipartisan support at this point for only two proposals: a crackdown on gun trafficking and school security improvements. The gun legislation will need 60 votes to break the Republican filibuster. Democrats control only 55 Senate votes, meaning Republican support will be needed to move to debate and a vote on passage. On Tuesday, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona repeated his earlier criticism of the effort to block the bill and called on his fellow Republicans to allow a full debate. "It's incomprehensible to me that we would not move forward with debate and amendments on an issue this important to the American people," McCain told reporters. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 09, 2013, 03:16:51 pm http://news.yahoo.com/conn-father-stunning-claim-son-school-teaching-americans-140036716.html
Conn. Father’s Stunning Claim: Son’s School Is Teaching That Americans Don’t Have the Right to Bear Arms 4/9/13 A Connecticut father is accusing his son's school district of teaching children that Americans do not have a constitutional right to bear arms. Steven Boibeaux of Bristol, Connecticut, is claiming that his child, an eighth-grader at Northeast Middle School, was given a social studies worksheet that is anti-Second Amendment in nature -- or, at the least, opposed to the conservative view of the provision. In an interview with Fox News' Todd Starnes, Boibeaux said that he's "appalled" and that the school seems to be "trying to indoctrinate our kids." The worksheet in question, published by Instructional Fair, is entitled, "The Second Amendment Today," and it allegedly proclaims that American citizens do not have the right to guns. "The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms," it purportedly reads. "The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional." When it comes to interpreting the Second Amendment, the worksheet provides additional parameters through which the constitutional provision should be viewed. Starnes explains: Quote The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states. "This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states," the worksheet reads. "So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws." According to the document, the Second Amendment "only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard." Boibeaux also alleges that the teacher told the class that the Constitution is a "living document" and the worksheet seems to drive this point home, noting that "the interpretation changes to meet the needs of the times." "I'm more than a little upset about this. It's not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means," the father told Starnes. "I just don't appreciate this as a parent. I expect teachers to teach my kids and tell the truth - not what they think their point of view is." This report comes as debate over classroom studies across America -- and CSCOPE and Common Core-aligned curriculum, in particular -- rages. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 09, 2013, 09:52:53 pm http://news.yahoo.com/senators-verge-deal-background-checks-003822584--politics.html
Senators on verge of deal on background checks 4/9/13 WASHINGTON (AP) — Members of both parties say a bipartisan deal is imminent that would expand the requirement for federal background checks for more gun purchases. An agreement could boost President Barack Obama's prospects for curbing firearms violence, though his effort's ultimate fate in Congress remains unclear. Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Chuck Schumer of New York said they were on the verge of an agreement. An aide to Republican Sen. Patrick Toomey of Pennsylvania said they appear close. Several Senate aides and lobbyists said the compromise would extend background checks to transactions at gun shows and online. They and Toomey's aide declined to be identified to discuss private talks. Manchin and Toomey were expected to announce their agreement on Wednesday. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 10, 2013, 04:10:12 am Quote "I'm more than a little upset about this. It's not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means," the father told Starnes. "I just don't appreciate this as a parent. I expect teachers to teach my kids and tell the truth - not what they think their point of view is." Teachers are just doing what they are being forced to do, which is to promote the federal government's lies. It's not teachers that are saying that stuff. It's the government who is pushing it on school districts, under threat of losing federal dollars. Quote "This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states," the worksheet reads. "So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws." According to the document, the Second Amendment "only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard." Now THAT is right out of the federal government's official claims. It's the ONLY way they can justify their illegal National Guard over a militia, which is to say the right extends only to the military, not citizens, when the reality is that the amendment was designed to protect against federal tyranny against it's citizenry! No, it's not the teachers, or even principles, it's the school boards that are bowing to the pressures of the federal government. Quote Boibeaux said that he's "appalled" and that the school seems to be "trying to indoctrinate our kids." Again, it's not the schools perse' that want to indoctrinate the kids, but yes, indoctrinate is exactly what they are doing, and have been doing for decades. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 11, 2013, 11:37:45 am Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, http://news.yahoo.com/senate-start-votes-gun-control-measure-124754266.html Senate votes to open debate on gun control 4/11/13 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate cleared the way on Thursday for an emotional, weeks-long debate on proposals to curb gun violence, rejecting an effort by conservative Republicans to block consideration of gun-control legislation prompted by December's Newtown school massacre. The Senate voted 68-31 to open debate on President Barack Obama's proposals to expand background checks for gun buyers, tighten restrictions on gun trafficking and increase funding for school security. The Senate easily cleared the 60-vote hurdle needed to break a Republican filibuster on a bill that has sparked intense lobbying on both sides, including families of the Connecticut victims as well as the powerful gun lobby the National Rifle Association. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 12, 2013, 10:32:25 am http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-11/mental-illness-didn-t-kill-rick-warren-s-son-a-gun-did-.html
4/11/13 Mental Illness Didn't Kill Rick Warren's Son. A Gun Did. The Washington Post reports today that the death of Pastor Rick Warren's son, Matthew Warren, has "spurred discussion within church communities about how a fervent belief among evangelicals in the power of prayer and dependence on God and Jesus for healing might stifle congregants from talking about mental illness or seeking help for themselves or family members." One of the nation's most popular and influential pastors, Warren last weekend sent an e-mail to followers announcing that his 27-year-old son had killed himself. Warren was explicit about his son's mental illness, citing Matthew's "dark holes of depression and even suicidal thoughts. In spite of America's best doctors, meds, counselors, and prayers for healing, the torture of mental illness never subsided." What the grieving father has not yet mentioned was how Matthew died. Mental illness may have plagued the younger Warren, but it didn't kill him. A gun did. The incidence of mental illness in the U.S. is roughly on par with other developed nations. The availability of guns is not. There were more than 19,000 firearms suicides in the U.S. in 2010; guns were responsible for about half of all suicides. For Americans under 40, suicide is a leading cause of death, and the presence of a firearm in the home is a serious risk factor. In a 2008 article in the New England Journal of Medicine, Harvard researchers Matthew Miller and David Hemenway wrote: "The empirical evidence linking suicide risk in the United States to the presence of firearms in the home is compelling. There are at least a dozen U.S. case–control studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide. Moreover, the increased risk of suicide is not explained by increased psychopathologic characteristics, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempts among members of gun-owning households." One reason guns are such a high risk factor is that many suicides are impulsive. According to one study, one quarter of serious, nonfatal suicide attempts took place less than five minutes after the decision to commit suicide. The Los Angeles Times reports today that authorities believe the younger Warren was probably not the owner of the gun that he used to kill himself. It's unclear how much planning or forethought he put into his suicide. Rick Warren, who has sold 30 million copies of his book "The Purpose Driven Life," is using his influence to open the door to a much-needed discussion of mental illness among evangelicals. He deserves thanks as well as sympathy. Perhaps in time he can also initiate a discussion about the role of guns in suicide. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Open the door to a much-needed discussion of mental illness among evangelicals? Not anymore, now that Warren blamed the gun bought illegally by his son. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 12, 2013, 10:44:18 am Somebody better forward this to Capitol Hill and Rick Warren...(and Texas has one of the LOOSEST, if not THE loosest gun laws in the country)
http://oudaily.com/news/2013/apr/10/community-college-stabbing/ 4/10/13 Man stabs 14 at community college, two critically injured CYPRESS, Texas (AP) — A man accused of stabbing more than a dozen people at a suburban Houston community college chose his victims at random, authorities said Wednesday, going from one floor to another as he used a razor utility knife to slice people in the neck and face. Neighbors and the grandmother of Dylan Quick were at a loss to explain the attack on the Lone Star Community College campus in Cypress — an attack that authorities say the 20-year-old had fantasized about for years. All 14 of the people who were injured were expected to recover. “To me he’s just always been a good kid, loving. He’s close to his family. He’s close to his mother and father,” Dolores Quick, his 85-year-old grandmother, said in a telephone interview from her home in Dearborn, Mich. “It’s just really torn me up. I’m just so sad for everybody.” She said she doesn’t see her grandson on a regular basis, but that she talked to him on the phone every so often. Officials at the school and people who lived in Quick’s middle class neighborhood described him as well-liked and friendly, but also withdrawn. Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia said while Quick has been cooperative and forthcoming with investigators, the motive for the attack was still a mystery. “He has shared with us that he’s had fantasies about stabbing people since the age of 8,” Garcia said. “He did share that he had been planning this event for some time.” Classes resumed Wednesday at the bustling campus where more than 18,000 students take courses. Students and others were overheard talking about the attack, riveted by the sequence of events that left 14 injured, two critically. Students said workers were seen Wednesday morning washing away blood stains from outside the school’s health science building. Campus President Audre Levy said Quick had worked on the school’s library for about a year and that “the library staff had fond things to say of him” and that many of the library staff were “very surprised” by the allegations. “There are no signs that he was a problem student. Many of the faculty who had him reported he was a good student,” she said. The attack took place on the first and second floors of the health science building, but investigators weren’t yet certain on which floor it began. They were working Wednesday to piece together the sequence of events. Quick slashed at his victims with a razor utility knife, and prosecutors said a scalpel was found in his backpack. A bloody knife tip was removed from the chest of one of the victims, according to prosecutors. All but two of the victims had been released from local hospitals by Wednesday. Levy said college police were notified of the attack at 11:13 a.m. Tuesday and that Quick was taken into custody at 11:17 a.m. Authorities said students assisted by tackling Quick and holding him down outside the health science building until police arrived. Quick remained in custody Wednesday and a spokeswoman with the Harris County district attorney’s office said no additional charges were expected. She said Quick has been ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation. Court records did not list an attorney for Quick, and his parents did not return several phone calls Wednesday seeking comment. Michael Lincoln, who lives next door to Quick and his parents, recalled borrowing a ladder from the family in January so he could remove some branches that had fallen on his roof after a storm. Quick lent him the ladder but then proceeded to use it to remove the branches himself, saying, “That’s what neighbors are for,” according to Lincoln. “I never would have expected (the attack) from him. I guess you never really know anybody,” Lincoln said. Dolores Quick said she had spoken with her son, Dylan Quick’s father, earlier this week and he had indicated that the family members “were all OK.” “It’s just very, very tragic, unbelievable,” she said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 12, 2013, 03:48:57 pm Well, Arizona has open/conceal carry no registration(private purchase- FFL dealers will register a handgun)/permit needed. Not sure you can be much more gun-owner friendly. But in spite of the law here, I've seen what I thought was likely a private citizen open carry a sidearm. ONCE since 2003. And we haven't had citizens taking down criminals with their firearms either like some want to suggest. Most may have a gun, but a surprising number of people simply don't exercise that right, so criminals are able to stab a bunch of people in spite of gun laws, and not a single citizen be armed as they are stabbing away.
They going to start registering knife owners too? ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 14, 2013, 09:35:03 pm Civil war battle lines being drawn as Magpul, Colt, Beretta and other gun manufacturers relocate to pro-Constitution states
A civil war looks likely to break out in America, and it will pit gun rights advocates (people who love liberty) against gun control zealots (people who hate freedom and love tyranny). The battle lines are being drawn right now as gun manufacturers are leaving anti-Constitution states like Connecticut and Colorado and relocating to pro-Constitution states like Texas and Arizona. Why does this matter? Because in effect, the anti-Constitution states are disarming themselves by expatriating weapons manufacturers. Thus, they are eliminating their own weapons infrastructure and leaving themselves relatively defenseless should a civil war occur. States like Texas and Wyoming, where gun manufacturers are increasingly moving and setting up shop, are simultaneously building up a massive arms infrastructure that may ultimately spell the difference between victory and defeat in a civil war. This is the tragic truth of the current anti-America, anti-Constitution, criminal government takeover happening in multiple states across our Republic right now: those who hate liberty are disarming themselves. Colt moving to Texas, others likely to follow If the majority of people in states like New York, Connecticut and Colorado wish to be disarmed slaves living as subjects to a tyrannical government, then they are also going to see more gun owners leaving those states and seeking new lives in gun-friendly states like Texas, Montana, Arizona and Idaho. I can tell you firsthand that here in Texas, we shoot big, heavy firearms on the weekend (.50 BMG), and if the local sheriff shows up, it's only because they want some trigger time, too! (You gotta pick the right county, though. Stay away from Travis County at all costs...) Because Texas is a state that upholds the Second Amendment rights of its citizens, Texas is already attracting both gun manufacturers and gun-friendly citizens who are relocating there. For example, firearms maker Colt is leaving Connecticut and moving to Texas, bringing valuable skills, hardware, manufacturing equipment and jobs to Texas. Magpul industries, makers of 30-round rifle magazines, also says it's leaving Colorado and looking for a destination more aligned with the Constitutional rights of American citizens. Such moves are not only valuable for the Texas economy; it also means that once the Civil War is unleashed in America and the collectivist anti-American, anti-Constitution leftist gun grabbers try to force national disarmament at gunpoint, states like Texas will be cranking out Colt rifles and putting them into the hands of freedom fighters who will send as much lead down range as is necessary to reinforce the point that the Bill of Rights is not negotiable. Texas also controls much of the national energy supply If leftists living in treasonous states try to push their criminal agenda onto the entire nation, let 'em figure out how to live without energy, too. Texas not only has the guns, you see... it's also got the energy. Over one-third of America's oil and natural gas flows through Texas-based refineries and ports. Any attempt to mess with Texas means the rest of the country won't get its energy needs met. Texas can defend its resources with -- guess what? -- citizens armed with rifles made in Texas, loaded with high-capacity magazines made in Texas, shooting bullets loaded in Texas in full alignment with the Bill of Rights that's defended in Texas. That's why every time another criminal state government (like that of Connecticut) passes another unconstitutional law stripping its own citizens of the right to own firearms, I cheer when the gun manufacturers in that state announce they're moving out. If Boulder, Colorado wants to fulfill its socialist dreams of total government tyranny, then we all welcome MagPul exiting Boulder and setting up shop in a pro-Constitution zone where the company's many talents will be fully appreciated. Traitorous states are disarming themselves I love the idea that all these companies are moving out of wannabe communist cities like Boulder, or traitorous anti-Constitution states like Connecticut. Because in truth, we want the anti-Constitution states to have no weapons manufacturing infrastructure. It will make them easier to defeat in a military campaign designed to free the enslaved citizens living in those states from tyranny rule. This fact is multiplied even further by the fact that many U.S. gun and ammo manufacturers are REFUSING to sell equipment to anti-Constitution governments, including the state government of Connecticut. The full list is posted at The Police Loophole. It's a huge list of weapons manufacturers and retailers, including Barrett, Midway USA, Cheaper Than Dirt, Larue Tactical, Rock River Arms, Bravo Company USA and more. What this means is that if the traitorous, criminal federal government attempts to overrun the People with the 2 billion rounds of ammo DHS has been stockpiling, they're going to find themselves outgunned and out-supplied by the private gun and ammo manufacturing and distribution industry which will absolutely NOT sell any equipment to the federal government. By the way, private individuals are buying up hundreds of millions of rounds of ammo each week, vastly out-pacing DHS stockpiling. On top of that, there's also the fact that brain-dead DHS employees are too stupid to know how to use firearms effectively in the first place. If DHS hands all their stockpiled guns to TSA agents, for example, they're far more likely to shoot off their own toes than wage anything resembling a tactical war. They would be almost instantly out-maneuvered and out-gunned by veterans, hunters, sheriff's deputies and privately-trained citizens. It is important to bring all collaborators to justice It's going to be hilarious seeing all the governors and state representatives of the traitorous anti-gun states trying to defend themselves against armed arrest squads when they have no weapons. I'm just curious how all these traitorous lawmakers think they're going to defend themselves against real justice once the shooting begins. Are they so delusional that they think nobody is recording their names and votes? To be on the record voting to destroy the Second Amendment is nothing less than treason. To cast such a vote in a nation founded on armed resistance to tyranny is nothing less than suicide. Because the anti-Constitution criminals have disarmed themselves, the pro-Constitution justice teams will be able to march right in, arrest these traitors for sedition and round them up for a mass trial where they can join their fellow traitors from Colorado, New York and California (among other states). For the purposes of law and justice, it will be very important to make sure that all those who have actively violated the Bill of Rights be arrested, charged and brought to trial for their crimes. Historically, the typical punishment for those found guilty of acts of treason against their own nation has been the death penalty (i.e. firing squad). (I'm not calling for that, nor condoning that. I'm merely pointing out actual history.) Even further, those who have actively conspired to destroy America's Constitution and Bill of Rights are, by the government's own definition, "enemy combatants," meaning they may be held and imprisoned under the rules of war. It's time we all began to understand that lawmakers who vote for unconstitutional gun control measures in America are, by definition, "enemy combatants" who are engaged in actual warfare against America. They have moved the nation far past the era of polite debate. These traitors now have put guns to all our heads, demanding we comply or be arrested. In New York and elsewhere, many innocent citizens have already been thrown in jail for the "crime" of exercising their constitutional rights. The war against liberty has begun, and the battle lines are being drawn as gun and ammo manufacturers relocate to states that choose to side with the Constitution rather than outright tyranny. You would be wise to make a similar choice. If you are a person who believe in anything resembling liberty -- owning a gun, growing your own food, homeschooling your children -- you will be arrested and imprisoned during the civil war if you stay in the criminal anti-Constitution states. On the other hand, those very same activities will be openly welcomed in pro-Constitution states that actually abide by the law of the land. And it is those states that will have the hardware advantage once the fighting starts. For your convenience, here's a list of criminal, traitorous anti-Constitution states vs. relatively pro-Constitution states: (some states are not listed because they do not neatly fit into either category) List of criminally run, anti-Constitution states Get OUT of these states if you value liberty! California New York New Jersey Connecticut Massachusetts Maryland Rhode Island Pennsylvania Illinois Michigan Colorado Hawaii Alabama List of (relatively) pro-Constitution states MOVE to these states if you value liberty! Texas Wyoming Montana Utah Idaho Arizona Nevada New Mexico Alaska North Dakota South Dakota Nebraska Kansas Oklahoma Wisconsin Missouri Arkansas Louisiana Indiana Ohio Kentucky Tennessee Mississippi Georgia South Carolina Florida West Virginia Vermont New Hampshire Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039897_civil_war_battle_lines_gun_manufacturers.html#ixzz2QUn0iamw Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 14, 2013, 10:04:55 pm ^^ Not to side-track this thread, but since 2010, a few states have passed stricted anti-abortion laws. Last I checked, the so-called "GOP" has governors in about 30 states.
Pt being that personally, I find it rather fishy that they've waited until 2010(when Obama, of all people, got into office) to start realizing something needs to be done about abortion, gun rights, and pretty much every pro-citizen/pro-family issue out there. Yeah, for George W. Bush's 8 years, these same "groups" did next-to-nothing(including saying nada when 2 pro-Roe V Wade justices, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, were appointed to the high court). And not to mention too they largely focused on Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky when Clinton was President. As for the gay marriage issue - from what I understand, DOMA will be struck down, and CA's Prop 8 will be struck down, but likely no broad gay marriage legalization will be ruled. Ultimately, it's going to create a big mess for the country b/c for example, if a gay married couple in California is asked to relocate(ie-for employment reasons) to an anti-gay marriage state like Oklahoma, while they can file MFJ on their federal returns, it's going to create confusion for everyone involved in OK as they have to file MJS or SINGLE EACH for state returns, and a whole new can of worms will be opened up as more cases pop up over other states(ie-NY and CT allow gay marriage too). Anyhow, didn't mean to ramble here, but as you can see, whoever's behind all of this(ie-likely the Jesuits), they couldn't have timed it any better in terms of stirring up all of these agendas on both sides only recently, and having all of the pieces in play and ripe for Civil War. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 15, 2013, 10:27:35 am First Obamacare, then the recent gay marriage cases(no, they ruled on it yet, but they've hinted they would favor the gay rights groups at least to some extent), and now this...the USSC is finally showing their true fangs now.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-15/new-york-gun-limits-intact-as-high-court-rejects-appeal.html?cmpid=yhoo 4/15/13 New York Gun Limits Intact as High Court Rejects Appeal The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a rebuff to gun-rights advocates including the National Rifle Association, leaving intact New York’s requirement that people wishing to carry a handgun in public show a special need for protection. Refusing for now to be drawn into the fractious nationwide debate over firearms, the justices today let stand a federal appeals court decision that said the century-old New York law didn’t infringe the Constitution’s Second Amendment. The court made no comment, turning away an appeal by five New York residents and a gun-rights group as part of a list of orders released in Washington. High court review of the New York case would have threatened public-possession restrictions in as many as 10 states. Lower courts are divided on the measures, making it likely the Supreme Court will consider the issue at a later point. “It is only a matter of time before the justices hear a case about public possession of guns,” said Adam Winkler, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law and the author of a book on the history of the gun-rights battle. In upholding New York’s law, which requires applicants to show “proper cause” to get a permit to carry a weapon, a federal appeals court pointed to what it called “a longstanding tradition of states regulating firearm possession and use in public because of the dangers posed to public safety.” Westchester County The measure was challenged by five residents of New York’s Westchester County and the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun- rights group based in Bellevue, Washington. The National Rifle Association and 20 states backed the appeal. The state “treats the carrying of handguns for self- defense not as a right but as an administrative privilege lying beyond the reach of most people,” the residents, led by Alan Kachalsky, argued in court papers. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman countered that the state’s law “is similar to the types of longstanding laws that courts have repeatedly upheld.” In 1981, just three states -- Maine, Washington and Vermont -- let typical residents carry firearms in public without giving a reason. Today, about 40 states do. Divided Courts Federal appeals courts are divided on the remaining laws that restrict public possession. A different court struck down an Illinois law that barred most people from carrying a loaded weapon in public, saying it violated the Constitution’s Second Amendment. A third federal appeals court last month upheld a Maryland law that requires “good and substantial reason” for having a handgun in public. A fourth case, involving a New Jersey law, is now before yet another appeals court. Those cases may eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court. The legal disagreement stems from ambiguities in the 2008 Supreme Court decision that, for the first time, said the Constitution protects an individual right to bear arms. That ruling focused on gun rights in the home, striking down a District of Columbia handgun ban. A follow-up case in 2010 also involved in-home possession. Greater Power In the New York case, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that, while the Second Amendment applies in public, the government has greater power to impose restrictions there. Outside the home, “public safety interests often outweigh individual interests in self-defense,” the three-judge panel said. The December shooting at Newtown, Connecticut, which killed 20 children and six adults, unleashed a flurry of legislative activity around the country, often dividing lawmakers along partisan lines. New restrictions on guns have passed in New York, Connecticut, Colorado and Maryland, all of which are led by Democrats. More states have moved in the opposite direction: Six relaxed restrictions, including those on carrying guns into churches, schools or workplace parking lots. The Senate is considering legislation that would expand the number of people subject to background checks when they buy a firearm. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 15, 2013, 11:27:45 am http://news.yahoo.com/yorks-assault-weapon-registration-begin-070029231.html
New York's 'assault weapon' registration to begin 4/15/13 ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — Key measures of New York's tough new gun law are set to kick in, with owners of guns now reclassified as assault weapons required to register the firearms and new limits on the number of bullets allowed in magazines. As the new provisions take effect Monday, New York's affiliate of the National Rifle Association said it plans to head to court to seek an immediate halt to the magazine limit. Gov. Andrew Cuomo calls those and other provisions in the state's new gun law common sense while dismissing criticisms he says come from "extreme fringe conservatives" who claim the government has no right to regulate guns. "Yes, they are against it, but they are the extremists and the extremists shouldn't win, especially on this issue when it is so important to the majority," Cuomo said in a radio interview Wednesday. "In politics, we have to be willing to take on the extremists, otherwise you will see paralysis." more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 15, 2013, 01:16:52 pm Let the Propaganda Roll...
http://news.yahoo.com/john-kerry-foreign-students-scared-study-abroad-u-154814080.html John Kerry: Foreign Students ‘Scared’ to Study Abroad in U.S. Because of Gun Violence 4/15/13 US Secretary of State John Kerry delivers remarks to US Foreign Service workers during a 'meet and greet' visit to the US Embassy in Tokyo on April 15, 2013. (Photo: AFP/Getty Images) Secretary of State John Kerry told CNN Monday that foreign students are increasingly "scared" of studying abroad in the United States because of gun violence. America's top diplomat has been in Asia to confront North Korea's increasing aggression but, speaking from Tokyo, he pivoted to American politics. In "quiet conversations" with officials, Kerry said he has discussed "how safe it is over here in this country [Japan], where people are not running around with guns." He continued: "We had an interesting discussion about why fewer students are coming to -- particularly from Japan -- to study in the United States, and one of the responses I got from our officials, from conversations with parents here, is that they're actually scared." "They think they're not safe in the United States, and so they don't come." The number of Japanese foreign exchange students did indeed drop 14% from 2010 to 2011, according to the Institute of International Education, but Kerry might be attempting to lend international credibility to his party's recent push for stricter gun control in saying "people running around with guns" is the reason. Fewer Japanese students are studying abroad everywhere, not just the United States, and experts think Japan's low birthrate coupled with the faltering economy are more likely causes, CNN adds. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 15, 2013, 05:01:59 pm They think it's not safe because they have been told it's not. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 16, 2013, 06:20:41 pm http://news.yahoo.com/calif-dems-push-wide-ranging-gun-control-bills-182538505.html
Calif. Dems push wide-ranging gun control bills 4/16/13 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers took their first step toward moving a gun control legislative package Tuesday, following similar tough firearm and ammunition restrictions enacted in several other states in the wake of recent shooting rampages. As dozens of supporters and opponents packed the committee room, Democrats in the state Senate began to use their majority to advance a group of seven bills that would further tighten California's strict gun laws. One of the proposals would prohibit the sale of any semi-automatic rifle that accepts detachable ammunition magazines, prompting activists on both sides of the debate to say the plan goes beyond bans in other states. "We simply can't wait until the next tragedy before taking action," Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told the Senate Public Safety Committee. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 17, 2013, 04:00:37 am Here's a different angle on this story...
How strange that the guy who runs the company Cerberus (which I personally believe may be a government front company), who owns Bushmaster, his father lives in Newtown. What are the odds? The other point that keeps coming to mind is that this Cerberus company is playing a part in an effort to gain control of the firearms market to manipulate sales, etc., which could theoretically lead to a company being closed down due to some kind of "performance" problems, like say, nobody wants to buy the company... http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/17/us-freedom-group-idUSBRE93G01620130417 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/17/us-freedom-group-idUSBRE93G01620130417) Quote Exclusive: Cerberus founder explores bid for Bushmaster gunmaker By Olivia Oran, Greg Roumeliotis and Martinne Geller Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:43am EDT (Reuters) - Private equity mogul Stephen Feinberg may bid for the Bushmaster rifle maker that his firm Cerberus Capital Management LP put up for sale after one of its guns was used in a Connecticut school shooting, three sources familiar with the situation said. Feinberg, along with other senior Cerberus partners, is putting together a consortium to make a "stalking horse" offer designed to spur competition for Freedom Group, which makes the Bushmaster rifle, the sources said on Tuesday. Cerberus is under pressure from the public as well as investors in its funds to sell Freedom Group following the massacre that took place in December in Newtown, Connecticut. A bid by Feinberg for a company that his own firm owns would be a rare move in the private equity industry. The move raises potential conflict of interest issues, as it could pit the founder's interest against those of the investors in Cerberus funds, known as limited partners. It may also indicate Cerberus may be having problems in selling the company. Banking sources have said that major Wall Street firms have been unwilling to finance a bid for Freedom Group. Feinberg has approached other wealthy individuals to join him in the bid, the sources said, who declined to be identified because the auction is private. He has not made a bid and may yet decide against it, they said. Cerberus declined to comment and declined to make Feinberg available for an interview, while representatives of Freedom Group could not be reached for comment. Freedom Group's AR-15 type Bushmaster rifle was used in the December shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, which left 20 children and six adults dead. University of California is among Cerberus investors that have been putting pressure on the private equity firm to quickly sell Freedom Group. "We do not want to have investments in companies that sell, manufacturer or distribute firearms," spokeswoman Dianne Klein said in an email on Tuesday. The university has a $1 million indirect investment in Bushmaster through a Cerberus private equity fund. Cerberus' fund investors also include some of the largest U.S. public pension funds. CalSTRS, the California State Teachers' Retirement System, said in December it was reviewing its investment with Cerberus in the wake of the shooting. CalSTRS could not immediately be reached for comment. Soon after the shootings, Cerberus said it would look for a buyer and hired investment bank Lazard Ltd to help sell the business. Lazard declined to comment. The stocks of publicly traded gunmakers such as Smith & Wesson Holding Corp and Sturm Ruger & Co, which fell after the shooting, have since recovered. Proposed gun control legislation in U.S. Congress since the shootings has made only modest progress and has been heavily watered down. CONFLICT OF INTEREST One of the sources familiar with the auction said Cerberus is planning to prevent conflicts of interests through measures including setting up an independent committee of Freedom Group's board of directors as well as a special shareholders committee. Under the plan, the independent board committee would include former generals and industry experts, while the shareholders committee would include investors in Cerberus' funds whose capital was committed for the Freedom Group investment, the source said. These two committees would then negotiate with Feinberg's consortium and decide on the eventual sale, the source said. Cerberus has also designed other measures to make sure the auction is fair if Feinberg decides to bid, the source said. If another buyer bids 10 percent or more above the stalking horse bid, Feinberg would be forced to drop out of the auction, the source said. There also would not be any break-up fee or other expenses paid by the company if Feinberg's bid is topped by another party, the source added. Feinberg and other senior Cerberus partners plan to invest their own money as well as roll over any existing stakes in the company to fund the bid, the source said. Under the bid being contemplated, Feinberg plans to be a minority investor, but he and his Cerberus partners could end up controlling the company, the source added. Cerberus bought firearms maker Bushmaster in 2006 and later merged it with other gun companies to create Freedom Group. The company's sales rose about 20 percent to $931.9 million in 2012. Feinberg worked at investment banks Drexel Burnham Lambert and Gruntal & Co before co-founding Cerberus in 1992 along with William Richter. Cerberus has more than $20 billion under management. Feinberg's father, Martin Feinberg, is a resident of Newtown, public records showed last year. (Additional reporting by Peter Henderson in San Francisco; Editing by Soyoung Kim, Paritosh Bansal, Chris Gallagher and Ryan Woo) Not only do I smell a rat, this looks like rat droppings! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 17, 2013, 02:09:19 pm Yeah, I know this comes from none other than a Hollywood celeb, but nonetheless I had a feeling that somehow gun control would get thrown in with this "crisis"...
http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/16/actor-blames-boston-attack-on-gun-culture-2nd-amendment-must-go/ 4/16/13 Actor blames Boston attack on gun culture: ’2nd amendment must go’ Actor and comedian Jay Mohr waded into the gun debate on Twitter after Monday’s deadly terrorist attacks at the Boston Marathon. “What bothers me most about today is that we’re getting used 2 it. ENOUGH. 2nd amendment must go. Violence has 2 stop. Culture MUST change,” the Jerry Maguire actor tweeted Monday night. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 17, 2013, 03:16:22 pm Well, idiot or not, he's right in that for the violence to stop, culture must change. What he doesn't realize is that culture won't change. Man cannot do it. Being corrupted, man is programmed to fail, and ultimately it is evil that drives culture in the world, and that won't change till Jesus Himself changes it in the end.
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation. 2 Peter 3:3,4 (KJB) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 17, 2013, 03:37:11 pm US Senate rejects gun background checks amendment on 54-46 vote; 60 votes needed for passage - @rollcallpols
:D Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 17, 2013, 03:43:41 pm ;D Ooops!
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 17, 2013, 04:04:36 pm http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/294499-sens-grassley-and-cruz-present-alternative-gun-bill
Sens. Grassley and Cruz roll out alternative gun control bill 04/17/13 12:27 PM ET The announcement comes on a day when the Senate appears likely to block further debate on a bipartisan background checks bill. “Rather than restricting the rights of law-abiding Americans, we should be focusing on keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals, which this legislation accomplishes,” Cruz said. “While the Obama Administration continues to politicize a terrible tragedy to push its anti-gun agenda, I am proud to stand beside my fellow senators to present common-sense measures that will increase criminal prosecutions of felons who try to buy guns, criminalize straw purchasing and gun trafficking, and address mental health issues.” Grassley and Cruz, along with Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dan Coats (R-Ind.) introduced the bill at a press conference Wednesday morning, just hours before the Senate will vote on it and other gun control measures. One of the primary criticisms Republicans had before a vote to move forward on a background checks bill last week was that they didn’t have time to read it before the vote. Cruz said that despite the late hour, his legislation has 20 co-sponsors and had been circulated among Republicans and Democrats with no negative feedback. He predicted that despite the small window before the vote, the bill would garner bipartisan support. The bill would increase the resources available to prosecutors for violators of gun laws, and creates a “Cruz Task Force” to prosecute those who fail criminal background checks. The task force is funded through an Asset Forfeiture Fund. The bill criminalizes straw purchasing and trafficking, measures Grassley supported in committee hearings on the gun control bill that will go before the Senate later this month. It also seeks to increase safety at schools, keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, and increases accountability for prosecutions at the executive level by requiring the Department of Justice to submit reports to Congress. The senators were particularly critical of the Obama administration’s record of prosecuting background check violations, saying it only took up a small portion of such cases. The bill does not expand background checks, but rather “focuses on making the backgrounds system work better…by encouraging states to report mental health records,” Cruz said. The National Rifle Association said it supports the bill. The bill includes provisions making it easier to purchase and transport firearms across state lines. The bill would allow for the interstate sale of firearms, and for the interstate transportation of firearms providing certain conditions are met. Guns transported across state lines will have to be unloaded, locked in a vehicle or kept in the trunk. Another pro-gun provision of the bill will allow military members to buy guns in the states where they’re stationed. Grassley said the bill was the result of “the combined efforts of many members of the Senate,” and called it “a sensible alternative” to Democratic gun control reform efforts that “addresses problems we’ve seen without burdening law abiding citizens.” Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/294499-sens-grassley-and-cruz-present-alternative-gun-bill#ixzz2Qky9z4DA Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 17, 2013, 04:05:36 pm Uh, Ted...everything you said DOES push a gun control bill. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 17, 2013, 04:19:47 pm Senate rejects GOP substitute bill on gun control reforms with 52-48 vote - @thehill
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 17, 2013, 05:54:00 pm More: Senate rejects assault weapons ban on 40-60 vote - @thehill
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 17, 2013, 09:03:16 pm http://www.cruz.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=341424
Grassley, Cruz Introduce Comprehensive Legislation That Targets Violent Criminals, Safeguards Second Amendment Wednesday, April 17, 2013 WASHINGTON, DC – Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) are introducing an alternative amendment to gun legislation pending on the Senate floor. Their “Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act” would preserve the Second Amendment while providing important fixes to existing law. The Grassley-Cruz proposal would reauthorize and improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), increase resources for prosecutions of gun crime, address mental illness in the criminal justice system, and strengthen criminal law by including straw purchasing and illegal firearm trafficking statutes. “When people study our amendment, they’ll see a sensible alternative that was developed from the ground up. It’s got wide-ranging, broad-based support and takes a responsible approach to fixing problems with the current background check system,” Grassley said. “We’ve put together an amendment that can effectively address some of the problems we’ve seen while protecting Second Amendment rights. I’ve been very interested in the mental health aspect of this debate, so we include provisions to study and address that issue. My oversight of Operation Fast and Furious highlighted some serious flaws within the gun trafficking and straw purchasing area, and Senator Cruz has done an exceptionally good job of helping develop that portion of our alternative. In addition, we both understand the importance of ensuring that Second Amendment protections are in place for veterans, along with every other American.” “I am glad to work with Sen. Grassley on this important amendment, which presents a reasonable alternative to the current legislation being considered while placing top priority on preserving Americans’ inalienable right to bear arms,” Sen. Cruz said. “Rather than restricting the rights of law-abiding Americans, we should be focusing on keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals, which this legislation accomplishes. While the Obama Administration continues to politicize a terrible tragedy to push its anti-gun agenda, I am proud to stand beside my fellow senators to present common-sense measures that will increase criminal prosecutions of felons who try to buy guns, criminalize straw purchasing and gun trafficking, and address mental health issues.” Sponsors of the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2013 include Senators Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, John Thune of South Dakota, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, John Hoeven of North Dakota, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Dan Coats of Indiana, John Cornyn of Texas, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, James Risch of Idaho, Marco Rubio of Florida, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, John Boozman of Arkansas, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Rob Portman of Ohio, and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. This legislation will: • Improve and reauthorize grants for NICS database; • Require federal courts to submit relevant information to NICS; • Ensure that relevant mental health records are submitted by states to NICS; • Condition federal grant money for states on their submission of mental health records to NICS; • Increase federal prosecution of gun violence by establishing the Nationwide Project Exile Program and establishing a high level federal taskforce; • Study of the causes of mass shootings; • Responsibly addresses gun violence by criminalizing straw purchasing of firearms and gun trafficking; • Second Amendment Protections for Veterans; • Require the Department of Justice to explain to Congress why it has or has not been prosecuting gun cases; • Place Limitations on Fast & Furious type operations by DOJ; • Authorize FFL’s to utilize the NICS database to for voluntary background checks of employees; • Authorize FFL’s to access the FBI’s National Crime Information Center stolen gun database to ensure that a firearm is not stolen prior to acquisition; • Reauthorize the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (MIOTCRA) with amendments; • Address school safety by Reauthorizes the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Secure our Schools Program through 2023. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 18, 2013, 04:33:43 am Quote • Ensure that relevant mental health records are submitted by states to NICS; • Condition federal grant money for states on their submission of mental health records to NICS; Not going to fly. That's basically bribery. Conditional grant money to the states, based on if the state plays ball? The federal government has no money, so where's the threat? The problem they are having is that gun rights are a states rights issue that the feds have no right to interfere with. And notice this... Quote • Place Limitations on Fast & Furious type operations by DOJ; Really? So they want to limit how many guns the government runs to drug lords eh? Insanity. ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 18, 2013, 11:46:00 am NY Psychiatrists Served With Subpoenas For Patient Records In NY Gun Confiscation
4/15/13 http://www.ammoland.com/2013/04/ny-psychiatrists-served-with-subpoenas-for-patient-records-in-ny-gun-confiscation/#axzz2QeUldu24 New Jersey --(Ammoland.com)- NY Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Machiavellian Plot to ignore and subvert the Rights of potentially millions of NY State residents developed another layer late Sunday. After breaking the story of Amhurst NY Area Resident David Lewis having his lawfully purchase and legally owned firearms confiscated by order of the State Police after a flagrantly illegal and Un-Constitutional review of his medical records , Word came to me in my capacity as in journalist late Sunday that NY Officials have apparently doubled down on their sinister plot and blatant abuse of power. My sources revealed that two prominent and well regarded Buffalo Area Psychiatrists received subpoenas from State Officials, possibly on Friday April 12th 2013, commanding them to turn over all of their patient files to the State. Details are sketchy at this early stage, but I have been told that both Doctors have in house counsel as well as potentially consulting with the Law Firm of Jim Tresmond, Firearms Law Specialist and the Attorney of Record for Mr Lewis. What is clear is that those subpoenas would have to have been issued by someone in the State’s Attorney’s Office. What remains unknown at this point is whether the order or request for the subpoenas originated with the Superintendent of the NY State Police, Joseph D’Amico or from the Office of the the Commissioner of the NY State Division of Criminal Justice Services or one of his lieutenants. If it’s accurate that the subpoenas in question were received by their targets on Friday April 12th 2013. That would be the same day that WBEN Talk Radio Show host Tom Baurele told listeners that multiple independent sources within NY State Government related to him that a secret seven member”HIPAA” committee had been created within the Div Of Criminal Justice Services after passage of the NY SAFE Act to work in conjunction with the NY State Police at the behest of the Dept of Homeland Security; for the express purpose of illegally obtaining and accessing the private medical records of potentially millions of NY State Residents. Then comparing those records with the records of known firearms owners and pistol permit holders in order to facilitate the confiscation of firearms under the extraordinarily broad language in the law regarding those that have been deemed “mentally unstable“. Something that thus far NY State Police have denied, choosing to blame the County Clerk, Chris Jacobs in the Lewis incident which was discussed at length on the Megyn Kelly show, also on Friday the 12th of April. Interestingly, the “mission statement” found on the website for the NY Div Of Criminal Justice Services contains language that could plausibly be used as “cover” for their involvement in this on going scheme. Quote “The Division of Criminal Justice Services is a multi-function criminal justice support agency with a variety of responsibilities, including collection and analysis of statewide crime data; operation of the DNA databank and criminal fingerprint files; administration of federal and state criminal justice funds; support of criminal justice-related agencies across the state; and administration of the state’s Sex Offender Registry that allows anyone to research the status of an offender. Our mission – the very reason we exist – is to make New York State a safer place to live, raise our families and run our businesses.” At DCJS, our core agency functions include criminal history checks, fingerprint operations, coordination of grant funds, providing timely information, public safety, law enforcement training, breathalyzer and speed enforcement equipment repair, accreditation of police departments and forensic laboratories, Uniform Crime Reporting, research, hosting criminal justice boards and commissions, providing information to criminal justice agencies and institutions, and hosting other criminal justice agencies. Much of our contact with the public involves the Sex Offender Registry, where anyone can check for the presence of high and medium risk sex offenders in their neighborhood (information on Level 1 or low level offenders can be obtained by calling 518-457-5837 or 1-800-262-3257 if you have a name you would like to check. You will need the individual’s name and another identifying fact, such as date of birth). We also support Operation IMPACT, an initiative where we provide special assistance to the 17 counties upstate and on Long Island that account for nearly 80 percent of the crime outside of New York City. This much is clear given the known facts, as well as the current and ongoing allegations and leaks. NY State is being “led” by a vociferously Anti Gun Governor that has a demonstrated history and extensive habitual evidence of his willingness to impose his will and personal opinion on the Citizens he claims to serve. This situation calls for the urgent appointment of a Special Prosecutor to investigate these egregious violations of both State and Federal Law, as well as the clear Civil Rights violations and violations of the targeted Citizens individual 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendment Rights. Those responsible for this unprecedented subversion of the rule of law and innocent Americans Rights must be held to account for their actions. If not, any flicker of hope for the concept of “all are equal under the law” will be snuffed out under the boot of the awesome power of the State against its Citizens. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 18, 2013, 12:56:04 pm Quote to facilitate the confiscation of firearms under the extraordinarily broad language in the law regarding those that have been deemed “mentally unstable“ What law? I assume NY passed some law pertaining to mental health patients and guns, and is the excuse they are using to confiscate guns. If no new law, then somebody needs to explain themselves. Government cannot go browsing through patient records without a warrant or an okay from the patient themselves. And what's up with this "HIPAA board"? They don't need a whole board of people to tell them the privacy rights under HIPAA. They already know exactly what the law says. This sounds like a board set up as some "expert" on the matter that they'll trot out when confronted, claiming legal advise by the board or some bs. Reality is more likely they have that board for the sole purpose of figuring out ways to circumvent HIPAA and gain access to records they don't currently have rights to. I've been thinking that California is a seriously real problem, and it is, but New York is showing itself as much worse, even bordering on a state of dictatorship. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 18, 2013, 03:09:17 pm I read in my paper today that the Cruz/Grassley proposal was rejected as well yesterday. However, just crossed paths with this article.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-decisions-made-on-gun-control-bill-boehner-2013-04-18?siteid=yhoof2 4/18/13 No decisions made on gun-control bill: Boehner WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- House committee chairmen are looking at gun violence proposals but no decisions have been made about legislation, House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday. "When we have a decision to announce, we'll announce it," Boehner told reporters, a day after the Senate defeated an amendment that would have expanded background checks for gun buyers. Boehner also said he plans to move forward with bills about expanding U.S. energy production, but did not give details. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Uhm, the bill was defeated by the Senate, so it should be dead, right? What's there to make a decision about? This thing may not be going away anytime soon. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 18, 2013, 03:12:00 pm Dead for now, according to Harry Reid...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/18/politics/congress-gun-laws/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/18/politics/congress-gun-laws/index.html?hpt=hp_t3) Quote Washington (CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Thursday he was setting aside proposed gun legislation for now following the defeat a day earlier of major provisions sought by President Barack Obama and Democrats in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre. Reid said he and Obama agreed it was time for a "pause" to let negotiations continue. (cont.) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 18, 2013, 07:56:49 pm (https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s480x480/165489_188158537999679_1763800576_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 20, 2013, 05:43:21 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/columbine-survivor-gun-bill-failure-not-over-151457085.html
4/20/13 On Columbine anniversary, survivor says gun bill fight isn’t over yet Katie Lyles was a sophomore at Columbine High School when her math class was interrupted by the sound of gunfire on April 20, 1999. She fled the class, and survived. But by the end of the day, she would find out that her lab partner from science class and one of her teachers were among the 13 people killed by a pair of seniors who went on a shooting rampage that day. Fourteen years later, Lyles, now an art teacher at an elementary school in the same Colorado community, decided to become an advocate for expanded background checks and other gun safety measures after the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut on Dec. 14. In the aftermath of that tragedy, Lyles became alarmed when some gun rights enthusiasts suggested that teachers or volunteers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons into school to prevent the next shooting. With the help of her teachers' union, the National Education Association, Lyles has lobbied lawmakers and shared her personal experience as a Columbine survivor and teacher to try to get new gun laws passed. She testified in front of the Colorado statehouse for stricter background checks and limits to high-capacity magazines, which eventually passed and were signed into law in March. But her advocacy on the national level was not so successful. On Wednesday, senators refused to bring a background check bill to a vote, dealing a significant blow to President Barack Obama's stated goal of passing what he calls commonsense gun reforms. The Senate came five votes short of clearing the procedural hurdle that would have allowed lawmakers to actually debate the bill. The failure came despite a compromise between Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W. Va.) and Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) that scaled back an earlier Democratic proposal to require background checks for nearly every single gun transaction, including those among friends and relatives. The Manchin-Toomey compromise would have covered just commercial transactions, including online and gun show sales, to ensure people with criminal records can't buy weapons. The National Rifle Association opposed the background check compromise, saying it would not "reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools." Lyles said she is disappointed the bill failed, but will continue to fight for the legislation. "This isn’t the end of the fight, this is the first inning of a nine inning game," Lyles said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2013, 11:39:08 am http://news.yahoo.com/gun-control-fight-spills-over-125243491.html
Gun control fight spills over to federal research As government plans research on firearms violence, NRA, gun control group differ on approach 4/24/13 WASHINGTON (AP) -- Washington's fight over firearms restrictions isn't limited to Congress. It's also taking place in the halls of science — literally — where gun control advocates and the National Rifle Association differ over the direction federal research on gun violence should take. John Frazer, research director of the NRA's legislative arm, told a committee of experts on guns and public health Tuesday that better data is needed on the benefits of gun ownership, such as peoples' use of firearms to defend themselves. Dan Gross, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, focused on obtaining more information on how people get guns and the deaths and injuries the weapons cause. The experts were meeting in a building used by the National Academies, a private organization that provides science advice to the government. The committee is deciding what recommendations to make about federal research of gun violence, which President Barack Obama ordered resumed after nearly two decades in which the work has been blocked by Congress. "This is not about developing a policy agenda for guns. This is about developing a research agenda," said Alan I. Leshner, chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, who is head the research committee. "We are the science folks." This year's debate over gun control, sparked by December's killing of 20 first-graders and six educators at a Connecticut elementary school, was hampered by old, at times unreliable data on guns. The Senate last week rejected a series of gun control proposals, and Democratic leaders put aside their effort to restrict firearms after realizing they lacked the votes needed for approval. Now, the battle is carrying over to the type of research each side thinks is needed. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 26, 2013, 09:57:01 am New Bill Would Require Background Checks for 'Explosive Materials':Senator Harry Reid has introduced a new bill that would require background checks for anyone purchasing 'explosive materials' or 'powders' commonly used to manufact
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/they-come-for-the-ammo-new-bill-would-require-background-checks-for-explosive-materials_04262013 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 26, 2013, 10:54:11 am The anti-
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 26, 2013, 04:25:01 pm Guns are worthless without ammo and they know it.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 28, 2013, 10:58:18 pm Currently the #1 trending news item on Yahoo...
http://wtvr.com/2013/04/28/9-year-old-apparently-killed-by-intruder-in-california/ 4/28/13 9-year-old apparently killed by intruder in California (CNN) — Investigators have no suspect in the stabbing death of a 9-year-old girl in her California home Saturday, a law enforcement official said Sunday. Leila Fowler’s brother found the child with “severe injuries” in the Calaveras County, California, home Saturday, and she was pronounced dead later at a hospital, according to Calaveras County Sheriff Capt. Jim Macedo. Her parents were “nearby at a public event” at the time, Macedo told reporters. The brother, who was not named, “is not a suspect at this time, but we are continuing to talk to him, which would be normal because he was the last person with the child,” he said. Detectives are tracking down dozens of leads phoned into a tip line created Saturday, including some leading to other counties, he said. A search of the family’s home overnight Saturday gave investigators a “substantial amount of evidence,” he said. He would not describe how the girl was killed. Witnesses have given police three differing descriptions of a possible intruder into the home, he said. The Sheriff’s Office is not releasing any of those descriptions, Macedo said. “We don’t want to lead anybody in the wrong direction,” he said. A widespread search is being conducted for clues, he said. Deputies will have an “increased and visible presence at the schools and bus stops” until the crime is solved, he said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 29, 2013, 05:34:45 pm http://silverdoctors.com/ge-capital-cuts-off-financing-to-gun-stores/
4/24/13 GE Capital Cuts Off Financing to Gun Stores Welcome to the new Fascist Amerika where only those businesses aligning with the goals of our fascist overlords are allowed to succeed. As the WSJ has reports tonight, GE Capital has just cut off all funding to gun dealers across the US: This month, Glenn Duncan, owner of Duncan’s Outdoor Store in Bay City, Mich., said he received a letter from GE Capital Retail Bank in which the lender said it had made “the difficult decision” to stop providing financing services to his store. Other gun dealers have received similar notices. With the Senate failing to pass Obama’s signature gun control legislation this week, it appears that the banksters are taking the destruction of the 2nd amendment into their own hands. As the WSJ reports: Quote General Electric Co. is quietly cutting off lending to gun shops, as the company rethinks its relationship to firearms amid the fallout from the school shooting in Newtown, Conn. This month, Glenn Duncan, owner of Duncan’s Outdoor Store in Bay City, Mich., said he received a letter from GE Capital Retail Bank in which the lender said it had made “the difficult decision” to stop providing financing services to his store. Other gun dealers have received similar notices. GE (NYSE:GE) is at least the second big financial firm to retreat from the gun business following the school shootings, which claimed the lives of 20 first-graders and six adults in December. With gun and ammo sales continuing to shatter records, we suspect that the firearms industry will do just fine without GE’s capital. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on April 29, 2013, 06:27:20 pm For the time being, that may be, but this ain't over. I have no doubt they will tighten the rules even more through simply taking away options.
Of course it matters not for Christians, seeing we aren't to use weapons of any kind anyway. Our weapon and protector is Jesus Christ in us. One must believe "no weapon formed against thee shall prosper". Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 01, 2013, 09:42:29 pm http://www.latimes.com/news/local/political/la-me-pc-gun-bill-20130501,0,7674608.story
5/1/13 Gov. Brown OKs funds to confiscate guns from criminals, mentally ill SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed legislation aimed at taking handguns and assault rifles away from 20,000 Californians who acquired them legally but have since been disqualified from ownership because of a criminal conviction or serious mental illness. The measure, the first of several gun-related bills to reach the governor, allocates $24 million in surplus funds to hire dozens of additional special agents to tackle a backlog of 40,000 weapons in the hands of people not allowed to possess firearms. “This bipartisan bill makes our communities safer by giving law enforcement the resources they need to get guns out of the hands of potentially dangerous individuals,” said Evan Westrup, a spokesman for the governor. The state operates a database that cross-references a list of gun owners with those disqualified later from owning guns. But, budget cuts have prevented the state Department of Justice from keeping up with the growing number of people on the list. State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) introduced SB 140, which takes the money from fees paid when people buy guns and allocates it to a three-year campaign to take guns from those ineligible to have them. “We know for the safety of our communities that these people should not possess guns, and our reinvestment in this tracking program gives us the opportunity to confiscate them,” Leno said in a statement. The measure was opposed by Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, who said it should be paid for by the state general fund. "Going after criminals is a good thing, but the way they are paying for it is grossly unfair," Paredes said. "They are putting the entire burden on the back of law-abiding gun purchasers." The measure, supported by state Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris, is one of more than a dozen gun-control bills introduced in the California Legislature following the massacre of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. “California is leading the nation in a common-sense effort to protect public safety by taking guns away from dangerous, violent individuals who are prohibited by law from owning them,” Harris said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 04, 2013, 01:47:14 pm http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/05/03/city-council-oks-ban-on-high-capacity-ammo-clips/
City Council OKs Ban On High-Capacity Ammo Clips May 3, 2013 1:17 PM LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A ban on the possession of large-capacity ammunition clips in the city of Los Angeles was one of two gun control measures the City Council approved Friday. The proposed ordinance – which was passed in an unanimous 11-0 vote – would declare high-capacity ammo clips a public nuisance and allow Los Angeles police to confiscate those firearms. The City Council also heard testimony from gun violence victims, including Women Against Gun Violence Boardmember Josh Stepakoff, who as a six-year-old, survived a 1999 mass shooting at the North Valley Jewish Community Center. A second motion from Councilmember Paul Krekorian was also approved that would establish an electronic reporting system aimed at improved tracking of ammunition sales and that supporters say would eliminate the need for police officers to travel to gun stores and shooting ranges to pick up documents. Krekorian had originally filed a motion in January to study the “feasibility, effectiveness and benefits” of an ordinance prohibiting possession of certain ammunition magazines within city limits. Gun rights lawyers sent a letter to the City Council this week threatening legal action if such a law were approved. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on May 05, 2013, 06:24:04 am Quote “California is leading the nation in a common-sense effort to protect public safety by taking guns away from dangerous, violent individuals who are prohibited by law from owning them,” Harris said. Really? I'd like to see the statistics on how many crimes were committed with a gun by a person who isn't legally allowed to own a gun according to California, especially the "serious mental illness" part. To say somebody is a dangerous "potential" criminal is, one, illegal, and two, is nothing but "pre-crime" accusations against people that have committed no crime yet. This business of labeling people a danger and saying they "might" commit a crime flies in the face of innocent till proven guilty. Those same people can't own a gun, but they can own a knife? Not owning a gun will make them safe to be around? Can the state guarantee that? Nope. The mentality of all this gun owner witch hunt is an outrage. Personally, I think those who fall into the mental illness category have a law suit against the state for labeling them a danger unfairly. Title: Looks like the "culture war" has shifted to gun rights... Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 05, 2013, 04:38:50 pm Not saying supporting gun rights is bad or anything, but remember the last "culture war" we had in this country for years and years...it didn't end too well...just saying.
http://news.yahoo.com/nra-official-culture-war-more-gun-rights-163302097.html 5/3/13 NRA official: 'Culture war' more than gun rights HOUSTON (AP) — The National Rifle Association kicked off its annual convention Friday with a warning to its members they are engaged in a "culture war" that stretches beyond gun rights, further ramping up emotions surrounding the gun control debate. NRA First Vice President James Porter, a Birmingham, Ala., attorney who will assume the organization's presidency Monday, issued a full-throated challenge to President Barack Obama in the wake of a major victory regarding gun control and called on members to dig in for a long fight that will stretch into the 2014 elections. More than 70,000 NRA members are expected to attend the three-day convention amid the backdrop of the national debate over gun control and the defeat of a U.S. Senate bill that would have expanded background checks for gun sales. It was introduced after December's mass shooting at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school. A small gathering of gun control supporters were outside of the convention in Houston. Porter's remarks came in a short speech to about 300 people at a grass-roots organizing meeting and set the tone for a "Stand and Fight"-themed convention that is part gun trade show, political rally and strategy meeting. "This is not a battle about gun rights," Porter said, calling it "a culture war." "(You) here in this room are the fighters for freedom. We are the protectors," said Porter, whose father was NRA president from 1959-1960. Rob Heagy, a former parole officer from San Francisco, agreed with Porter's description of a culture war. "It is a cultural fight on those 10 guarantees," he said, referring to the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution. "Mr. Obama said he wasn't going after our guns. As soon as the Connecticut thing happened, he came after our guns." That theme carried throughout the day and reached a crescendo in a 3 ½-hour political rally punctuated by fiery speeches from state and national conservative leaders. "You stood up when freedom was under assault and you stood in the gap, you made a difference," former U.S. senator and Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum told the cheering crowd of more than 3,500 at the rally. "This is a critical time in American history. Something big is happening in America," Santorum said. "Stand for America. Fight for America." Texas Gov. Rick Perry criticized gun control supporters as opportunists who prey on the raw emotions of tragic events. "You can almost set your watch for how long it takes for people who hate guns, who hate gun owners, to start a new campaign," after a mass shooting, Perry said. Obama, who has pushed for gun control measures, was a prime target for criticism the entire day. NRA Executive Director Chris Cox bragged about the organization's political victory. "It was great to see the president throw a temper tantrum in the Rose Garden," Cox said. Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, called the culture war reference a sign the NRA is worried about polls that show most Americans support some expansion of background checks. "They want to make it a culture war," Horwitz said. "They have to make it into something bigger. On the issue of background checks, they can't possibly win." Gun control advocates were determined to have a presence outside the convention hall. Across the street Friday, the No More Names vigil read the names of gun violence victims since the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Gun control advocates also planned a petition drive to support expanded background checks and a Saturday demonstration outside the convention hall. Erica Lafferty, whose mother, Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung, was killed by the gunman, was outside the building and said she hoped to talk to as many NRA members as she could. "I am not against people owning guns. I am asking for safe and responsible gun ownership and gun laws. I don't understand where the problem is with background checks," Lafferty said. While national polls have shown that a majority of Americans are in favor of expanding background checks, many convention attendees said Friday they were not in favor of such efforts. "We already have something like those laws now. We don't need new laws on top of the old laws. They need to enforce the laws that we have," said Charles Henderson, 59, a farmer from Amarillo, Texas. Inside the hall, visitors strolled past acres of displays of rifles, pistols, swords and hunting gear. Under Texas law, attendees could carry concealed weapons with a permit. Debbie and Daniel Ferris of Gun Barrel City, Texas, attended the grass-roots organizing workshop and agreed with Porter's assessment of a culture war. "It's about fighting tyranny," said Debbie Ferris, who has been an NRA member for five years. Her 35-year-old husband is a lifetime member. "We don't like to be pushed around," Daniel Ferris said. "We are free Americans." Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice presidential nominee and ex-Alaska governor, spoke to personal freedoms at the political rally as well, saying NRA members should "keep the faith" and "stand up and fight for our freedoms." But gun control supporters promise to keep pressing the issue and have made significant strides at the state level. Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, has said he will re-introduce the bill to require criminal and mental health background checks for gun buyers at shows and online. Colorado lawmakers recently passed new restrictions on firearms, including required background checks for private and online gun sales and a ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. Connecticut added more than 100 firearms to the state's assault weapons ban and now requires background checks for private gun sales. Maryland and New York have passed sweeping new guns laws, and in Washington state, supporters of universal background checks recently announced a statewide campaign to collect 300,000 signatures to take the issue straight to voters. "There are 90 percent of Americans that support this," Lafferty said. "We are not going away. It's a huge issue." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 06, 2013, 11:48:55 am (http://www.instantanalysis.net/media/84416/mrz050513dapr_500x344.jpg)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 06, 2013, 11:04:23 pm Delaware Senate OKs revised gun reporting bill
Republican provides tiebreaker to pass Senate measure 5/2/13 http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130503/NEWS/305030028/Delaware-Senate-OKs-revised-gun-reporting-bill?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1 DOVER — The Delaware Senate narrowly passed amended legislation Thursday that would require gun owners to call police if they lost or had their weapon stolen. Sen. Catherine Cloutier, R-Brandywine Hundred, provided the swing vote in the 11-10 balloting, which had three Democrats voting against the bill. The legislation now heads to the House for consideration. Cloutier said voting for the bill was “the right thing to do” in an attempt to slow illegal gun transfers. Democrats amended the bill Thursday to require reporting within seven days once the owner discovers that the firearm is missing. The original legislation, part of package of gun control proposals pushed by Gov. Jack Markell, required reporting within two days. The amendment also softened penalties included in the original. Under the change, first- and second-time offenders would face civil penalties and fines up to $250. Anyone failing to report a lost or stolen firearm a third time faces a felony charge. The measure attempts to crack down on so-called straw purchasers of firearms: those who buy guns and transfer them to people prohibited from owning one, often because of a criminal past. Its supporters, including many in law enforcement, said many who illegally transfer guns can claim the firearms were lost or stolen with little consequence. The legislation will allow the police to determine whether there is a pattern of reporting a weapon stolen if it turns up at a crime scene, said Lewis Schiliro, secretary of the state Department of Safety and Homeland Security. The National Rifle Association opposed the bill, calling instead for increased penalties for falsely reporting a firearm lost or stolen to police. Delaware’s Republican lawmakers proposed a bill to do just, but it has languished in the Democratic-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. NRA lobbyist Shannon Alford said the legislation that passed Thursday potentially makes criminals out of victims of crime, such as those who fail to report a gun was missing after a burglary. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 07, 2013, 05:22:26 pm http://news.yahoo.com/gun-control-background-checks-back-table-154500404.html
Gun control: Are background checks back on the table? 5/7/13 At least one Republican, Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, is reportedly considering changing his vote Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) may have breathed new life into a defeated amendment to expand background checks for gun buyers. The conservative is reportedly open to reversing his opposition, provided an exemption is added for online sales between friends. The reported about-face is possibly the first indication that the Senate could resurrect the bipartisan legislation, which was hammered out by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). In a demoralizing defeat for gun-control supporters, the amendment last month fell six votes shy of the 60 needed to get past a GOP-led filibuster. Flake is one of several lawmakers who have faced an angry backlash for opposing the tightened checks, which are backed by an overwhelming majority of the public. Indeed, Flake himself has said his plummeting poll numbers in Arizona put him somewhere "below pond scum." If Flake changes sides, it could give a boost to gun-control supporters who remain committed to passing the bill. Taking Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) into account (he voted "no" only for procedural reasons), Manchin and his allies "need to convince five senators to go from 'no' to 'yes,'" says Dana Bash at CNN. Flake is a good place to start if they hope to change the math. He is close to former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, a fellow Arizonan who, along with her husband, has been putting serious pressure on Flake to support the measure. Even if Flake is having second thoughts, the bill would need four more votes. Reid says he can deliver another Democrat or two, while other Republicans are reportedly under pressure to flip their votes. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) is seen as one of the more likely to change positions. Like Flake, she has taken a beating in her home state for opposing the bill, replete with a public scolding from the daughter of a victim of the Newtown school massacre. In a recent op-ed, Ayotte wrote, "I support effective background checks," though she said "we shouldn't be expanding a flawed system." "Whether that means she's resolved to stick to her guns by opposing T-M or whether she’s merely floating a trial balloon here to see if it’s enough to get gun-control fans to back off, we'll see," says Allahpundit at Hot Air. However, even if supporters of Toomey-Manchin are not where they need to be yet, "the bullish talk from Democrats — from leadership on down — is yet another indication that the party feels good about the fallout from the failed gun vote and is increasingly eager to try again," says Sam Stein at The Huffington Post. And if a minor tweak gives Flake a reason to change his vote, Toomey-Manchin could be back in business, because Flake will provide cover for anyone else looking to switch. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 07, 2013, 11:16:47 pm Senate to vote on Coburn gun amendments to water bill
5/7/13 http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/tom-coburn-gun-amendments-water-bill-91032.html?hp=f1 The debate over gun control is coming back to the Senate earlier than expected. The Senate agreed on Tuesday evening to vote Wednesday afternoon on a pair of firearms-related amendments to the Water Resources Development Act filed by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) “I don’t quite get why we’re voting on guns, but that’s the Republicans’ desire,” said the water bill’s floor manager, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). One amendment would repeal a gun prohibition on land under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers. The other would require annual reports from federal agencies on ammunition and gun purchases as well as firearm thefts, excepting some national security arms of government. A 2009 law repealed the gun ban in national parks and National Wildlife Refuge lands, but the corps has said it does not apply to corps projects. The corps manages 11.7 million acres, including hundreds of recreation areas and lakes. Coburn’s amendment would direct the corps to follow state gun laws on corps-managed land. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 08, 2013, 09:18:39 pm S. 792: Explosive Materials Background Check Act
113th Congress, 2013–2015. Text as of Apr 23, 2013 (Introduced). http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s792/text?utm_campaign=govtrack_email_update&utm_source=govtrack/email_update&utm_medium=email Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 13, 2013, 12:24:07 pm Pediatricians take on gun lobby – carefully
5/13/13 http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/13/18200262-pediatricians-take-on-gun-lobby-carefully?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2 To pediatricians, gun control is a public health issue, not a political one. But they're treading a fine line, and they know it. The American Academy of Pediatrics has begun a renewed push to try to get Congress to pass gun control measures, sending more than 100 pediatricians to Capitol Hill earlier this month. But others who have taken on the issue over the past decade have a warning for them: they can run afoul of the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups that are quick to paint anyone who advocates for gun control as a political extremist. What the doctors want is an assault weapon ban, mandatory background checks and waiting periods before all firearm purchases, a ban on high-capacity magazines, handgun regulations and requirements for safe firearm storage under federal law. “I think we can be honest brokers,” says Dr. Lolita McDavid, medical director for child advocacy and protection at University Hospitals, part of Case Western Reserve University’s school of medicine in Cleveland. “We have to have a collectively louder voice,” Dr. Danielle Laraque, who chairs the pediatrics department at Maimonides Infants and Children’s Hospital in Brooklyn, told a meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies in Washington, D.C. earlier this month. “What we need is a call to action, to really look at how we can change public policy that is not often affected by data.” They don't always get a friendly reception. Just two weeks before the doctors arrived, Congress had scuttled what gun-control advocates had considered a modest bill to expand background checks for gun sales. Congress had already dropped a wider measure pushed by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden after the December shootings of 20 schoolchildren and six adults in Newtown, Conn. Obama has been trying to roll back some of the restrictions placed on gun research by Congress. He’s issued an executive order specifically directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to conduct research into gun injuries. While the CDC was never banned from doing so, Congress had specifically cut precisely the amount CDC spent on firearms violence research, sending a clear message. “If you think that Congress has sort of been asleep…you are wrong,” said Dr. Daniel Webster of Johns Hopkins University, one of the few academic experts who has continued research on gun violence despite efforts to divert funding. “They have been doing a very good job of weakening the laws to make it easier for gun dealers to have the least amount of responsibility. They have made it harder to sue dealers and made it harder to access data on … which dealers are pumping out guns to criminals. They’ve made it almost impossible to prosecute a gun dealer.” Pediatricians are puzzled that the statistics aren’t speaking for themselves. “Where there are more guns in the United States, there are more people dying,” Dr. Matthew Miller of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center told the meeting in Washington, D.C.. “There are more women dying, there are more men dying, and there are more children dying. We are talking about a lot of people who are dying when they live in places with a lot of guns and homes with guns.” more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 15, 2013, 05:19:54 pm http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/omalley-plans-to-sign-maryland-gun-control-transportation-bills-thursday/2013/05/15/c988e70c-bd95-11e2-89c9-3be8095fe767_story.html
5/15/13 O’Malley plans to sign Maryland gun-control, transportation bills Thursday Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) plans to sign more than 250 bills into law on Thursday, including one of the most sweeping gun-control packages in the country and a plan to raise taxes on gas to yield more money for transportation projects. The signing ceremony in Annapolis will be the last in the wake of the 2013 legislative session, which lawmakers have called their most productive in years. Other bills expected to be signed Thursday will make talking on a cellphone while driving a primary offense, criminalize the use of synthetic marijuana and allow same-sex couples to file joint state tax returns. According to a list of bills released by his office, O’Malley also plans to sign a controversial bill that would exempt Lockheed Martin from paying about $450,000 a year in hotel taxes to Montgomery County related to a training center that the giant defense contractor operates in Bethesda. Aides to the governor also indicated Wednesday that he does not plan to veto any bills on policy grounds from the session that ended last month. In most previous sessions, O’Malley has objected to a small number of bills produced by the Democratic-led legislature. The gun-control legislation, which takes effect Oct. 1, will ban magazines that hold more than 10 bullets and will ban 45 types of semiautomatic rifles, classifying them as assault weapons. It also will require those seeking to buy any gun other than a hunting rifle or shotgun to obtain a license, a process that will include submitting fingerprints to police, passing classroom and firing-range training and undergoing more extensive background checks. The transportation bill is intended to replenish a fund that is rapidly running out of money for highway construction and long-planned mass-transit projects. Under the bill, motorists can expect to pay 13 to 20 cents more per gallon by mid-2016, according to legislative analysts. The increase would be phased in, with the first bump of about 4 cents a gallon coming in July. Transportation officials say the measure would yield $4.4 billion for new projects over the next six years. Under current Maryland law, motorists are not supposed to use cellphones while driving, but law-enforcement officials can only cite them if they are pulled over for some other reason. The law O’Malley plans to sign will change that. Montgomery County leaders were divided over the bill exempting Lockheed Martin from a local hotel tax. Supporters of the measure argued that the lodging facilities at the center are not a hotel and that the action was consistent with a decision the General Assembly made in 2010 to exempt it from state sales taxes. But opponents said the action by the General Assembly defied the will of a majority of the Montgomery County Council, which is on record opposing the tax break. As written, the bill applies to any company that operates a lodging facility in Maryland solely to support a training or conference facility that is not open to the general public. But no other facility currently qualifies for the relief. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 16, 2013, 01:39:39 pm With all of the current "scandals" making the MSM 24/7 now(Banghazi, IRS cracking down on conservative groups, etc)...do NOT be distracted by them as other potential draconian legislation starts to get moved right under everyone's noses...
Report: Boehner Trying to Move Gun Control Bill in the House 5/14/13 House Republicans are not ruling out passing gun legislation this year, according to a key GOP lawmaker. The collapse of gun control in the Senate last month led many on and off Capitol Hill to believe the issue would not be revived in this Congress. But House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) told The Hill on Friday that he’s had “a lot of discussions” with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on guns. Goodlatte suggested the Speaker is more involved in the behind-the-scenes wrangling of how to move a gun bill than the Ohio Republican has let on in public. “We are trying to improve the system to keep people who are barred under the law from owning firearms, from getting access to them. We don’t think the things that were proposed in the Senate do that. So we have not backed away from trying to figure out how to improve that, but we’ve made no decisions yet about what to do,” Goodlatte explained. Goodlatte, serving his first year as the head of the Judiciary panel, pointed out that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System needs to be reauthorized before year’s end. The reauthorization could be the vehicle through which the GOP tackles the highly charged issue. Goodlatte, who has an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA), said earlier this year he wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/05/report-boehner-trying-to-move-gun-control-bill-in-the-house/#ixzz2TTy3eyF7 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 17, 2013, 11:27:04 pm http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2013/4/obama-administration-to-sign-un-arms-trade-treaty-in-the-very-near-future.aspx
Obama Administration to Sign U.N. Arms Trade Treaty "In the Very Near Future" 5/17/13 As we reported last month, on April 2, the United Nations General Assembly voted 153-4 to pass the Arms Trade Treaty, with the United States voting in favor and several countries abstaining. The vote in the General Assembly pushed the treaty process forward after negotiations twice failed to deliver on the goal of developing the treaty by consensus. The Obama Administration is expected to sign the treaty soon after it is opened for signature on June 3. According to a May 16 Amnesty International article, a senior US diplomat--Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman--has confirmed the U.S. government will be quick to sign the new treaty. According to the article, Countryman said on Wednesday that the United States would sign the ATT "in the very near future." If the deeply problematic treaty is signed, the fight will move to the U.S. Senate, where the Obama administration would need to find 67 senators to ratify the treaty. Of course, anti-gun Amnesty International approves of the treaty and is advocating its signing and ratification. In addition, Amnesty International has gone so far as to claim that the treaty will not affect "domestic gun control regulations." On the contrary, the ATT does indeed threaten the rights and privacy of American gun owners. Signatories will be encouraged to keep information on the "end users" of arms imported into their territory and supply such information to the exporting country. Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms. And the treaty also encourages states to adopt domestic legislation to facilitate the treaty's onerous requirements. A majority of senators have already made clear their opposition to ratifying the ATT. On March 23, 53 senators endorsed an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2014, "establish[ing] a deficit neutral fund" to oppose United States entrance into the treaty. Additionally, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), along with 32 cosponsors, has put forth a concurrent resolution expressing the Senate's opposition to the ATT, as it "fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense... and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment." Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 20, 2013, 03:25:39 pm Bloomberg Uses Commencement Speech to Push Gun Control, Rail Against ‘Extremist’ NRA
5/20/13 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/bloomberg-uses-commencement-speech-push-gun-control-rail-against-extremist-nra (CNSNews.com) – New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg used a commencement speech to push his gun-control agenda, telling graduates of Kenyon College in Ohio that gun control is “something you really should think about.” Bloomberg, who co-chairs Mayors Against Illegal Guns, spent at least $14 million in support of legislation that would have required universal background checks for all gun-buyers. Although the bill died in the Senate on April 17, Bloomberg said the battle isn't over. “I believe we will win, sooner or later, because I believe that all of you, your generation more than any other at least since the 1960s, is reshaping society in fundamental ways by making your values known and your voices heard.” Bloomberg said Congress's failure to pass the gun control bill was "Washington at its worst -- the worst thing that it's ever done." "We'd not be fighting for change, I'd not be fighting for change and you would not be fighting for change if we didn't believe we could win.” Bloomberg's theme was "courage," something too many members of Congress lacked in the gun control debate, he said. “Have the courage to think for yourself and to believe in your ideas. That kind of courage lies at the heart of human invention and progress, and the lack of it lies at the heart of our political problems today,” he told the graduates. Bloomberg listed various mass shootings from Pittsburgh to Portland. “And after each one, those in Washington just shrugged,” he said. “Then Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut -- 20 children, six faculty members, all gunned down,” Bloomberg continued. “As a parent I can tell you it is just unthinkable if it happened to one of your children. After Newtown, President Obama and some congressional leaders finally, finally stood up and said something has to be done.” “I did everything I could to support them and to push Congress to act, but our efforts so far have not been enough to pass a piece of legislation requiring background checks for all gun purchases, that 90 percent of Americans agree with, including more than 80 percent of gun owners,” he said. “Why? Why do I tell you this?” Bloomberg asked. “Number one, this is one of the great tragedies happening in America and two, because I believe it comes down to one word, and that word is courage.” “Too many members of Congress did not have the courage to stand up to the increasing extremist views of the NRA's Washington lobbyists,” he said. “Many of them feared that voting for a common sense policy that would lead to someone challenging them in a primary, or hurt their chances to win a party's nomination to higher office is too big a price to pay for saving 30-odd thousand lives a year.” Bloomberg spent the better part of his 15 minute address on gun control, telling the graduates that since they were freshmen four years ago, more than 40,000 American people have been murdered with guns. "That's nearly as many Americans we lost in combat in the entire Vietnam War,” he said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 21, 2013, 01:13:01 pm THIS IS HUGE: OBAMA TO BAN GUN IMPORT—-Via EXCECUTIVE ORDERS —- no more milsurp parts sets. No more milsurp magazines. No more milsurp ammo. No more milsurp optics. Perhaps not even spare firing pins
4/23/13 Our country is under attack and Obama is focused on disarming citizens in violation of the 2nd Amendment. New backdoor import ban of all parts kits and hi cap mags After Senate setback, Obama quietly moving forward with gun regulation A Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Final Rule published today in the Federal Register and a news release issued Friday by the Department of Health and Human Services, followed up with a notice to be published tomorrow, are two developments all but ignored by the mainstream press even though Vice President Joe Biden announced last week that the administration would be using executive orders to advance “gun control” goals following a Senate battle that could not muster the votes to do so legislatively. http://www.examiner.com/article/after-senate-setback-obama-quietly-moving-forward-with-gun-regulation Just as I warned SurvivalBlog readers, it appears that the BHO Administration is taking executive action on firearms importation. Take a few minutes to read this:After Senate setback, Obama quietly moving forward with gun regulation. Here is the key portion of the article: “The Importation of Defense Articles and Defense Services — U.S. Munitions Import List references executive orders, amends ATF regulations and clarifies Attorney General authority “to designate defense articles and defense services as part of the statutory USML for purposes of permanent import controls,” among other clauses specified in heavy legalese requiring commensurate analysis to identify just what the administration’s intentions are. Among the speculations of what this could enable are concerns that importing and International Traffic in Arms Regulations [ITAR] may go forward to reflect key elements within the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”[Emphasis added.] Depending on how it is implemented, the implications of this change could be huge. With the stroke a of a pen and without the consent of Congress, ATF bureaucrats could make ANY gun part or accessory (including magazines) or ammunition that were originally manufactured or perhaps even those designed for military use no longer legal for importation for civilian use. That might mean no more milsurp parts sets. No more milsurp magazines. No more milsurp ammo. No more milsurp optics. Perhaps not even spare firing pins. This could be ugly. http://www.survivalblog.com/2013/04/here-come-the-first-of-the-executive-actions.html Obama To Ban Importation of Ammo, Magazines and Accessories Without Congressional Approval Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/this-is-huge-obama-to-ban-gun-import-via-excecutive-orders-no-more-milsurp-parts-sets-no-more-milsurp-magazines-no-more-milsurp-ammo-no-more-milsurp-optics-perhaps-not-even-spare-firing-p/#OmmJBorpjBPhxUKX.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on May 22, 2013, 03:37:16 am And to think, we still have 2 1/2 years of that clown in office! If they keep this insanity up, they shouldn't be surprised if they cause this country to explode with a violent response to federal tyranny. The only thing that remains is the question of just how many Americans even care about the Constitution. It's obvious that Washington has turned socialist under Obama. With the public so brain dead, it's questionable how many even know what socialism is.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 24, 2013, 12:39:02 pm http://www.chron.com/news/article/Court-rules-against-man-who-lost-handgun-permit-4546411.php
5/24/13 Court rules against man who lost handgun permit NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The Tennessee Appeals Court has ruled against a man who claimed state law regulating the carrying of firearms was unconstitutional. Leonard Embody filed suit in 2010 after state officials took away his carry permit, finding a "material likelihood of risk of harm to the public." The revocation came after Embody was detained by Belle Meade police in 2010 while walking with a .44 caliber black powder revolver in his hand. He was detained in 2009 while walking in Radnor Lake State Park with an AK-47-style pistol. There have been at least three similar incidents, although Embody was never charged with a crime. Embody claimed in court the Second Amendment gave him a right to carry firearms. The Appeals Court disagreed, ruling that the right to bear arms is not unrestricted. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on May 24, 2013, 02:32:51 pm Quote ...AK-47-style pistol... Really? Did they actually write that? Talk about ignorant. An assault rifle style handgun. Wow. ::) Quote Leonard Embody filed suit in 2010 after state officials took away his carry permit, finding a "material likelihood of risk of harm to the public." So this started with the state revoking his carry permit. I'd like to know what they deemed "a material likelihood". No criminal charges. Hmm, yet he was carrying a firearm without a permit. Is not that a crime by their law? Three plus occasions, and no charges? Was this a setup to get the courts to make an official ruling on guns and the government's stance that they can in fact restrict guns? The courts have ruled this before and is why government has the stance it can restrict the public access to guns. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 25, 2013, 01:10:38 am As for all of these news stories how gun sales have gone through the roof since Obama came into office, and then especially after Sandy Hook...
Let's not forget that Obama isn't the first President to push for big gun control legislation(and for that matter too it's not largely a "Democrat" issue either). Ronald Reagan did a lot of damage 3 times - as governor of CA, during his Presidency, and then in 1994 when he helped Bill Clinton passed an assault weapons ban. George Sr signed an assault weapons ban in 1989, and Mitt Romney did the same when he was governor of MA. OK, pt being that it's pretty obvious all of this(gun sales going through the roof, that is) happened during Obama's tenure in office b/c FEAR was pushed on the public(ie-how Obama was going to take everyone's guns away). Seriously - where was all their fear and concern when Reagan and Bush Sr pushed for heavy gun control legislation? I dunno, but at least to me, it looks like the gun industry and the NRA were using this opportunity to make some big profits. It all comes down to the love of money. 2Peter 2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 25, 2013, 08:40:20 am Illinois House votes to allow residents to carry concealed guns
The Illinois House of Representatives on Friday voted overwhelmingly to allow residents to carry concealed guns, taking the state one step closer to joining all others in allowing some form of carrying guns in public. Illinois is the only state in the nation to ban most people from carrying a concealed gun outside the home. Lawmakers acted on Friday after a federal appeals court in January struck down the ban, saying it violated the right to bear arms enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The court gave the state six months to pass a new law that would be constitutional. The National Rifle Association stayed silent on the proposal in order to avoid antagonizing some lawmakers who did not want to be seen voting for a plan backed by the gun lobby. But if the proposal backed by powerful Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan becomes law, it would achieve the NRA's longtime goal of ending the Illinois ban and making some form of concealed carry legal in all 50 states. The proposal faces stiff opposition from many lawmakers representing Chicago, where police say gun trafficking has led to a surge of violence and a rise in gang-related shootings and murders. Passage of the proposal in President Barack Obama's home state also would run counter to his administration's efforts to put more controls on guns in the wake of Newtown, Connecticut, school massacre last year. Democratic Governor Pat Quinn and the leader of the Illinois Senate, John Cullerton, vowed to fight the plan. "This legislation is wrong for Illinois," Quinn said in a statement after the vote. "We need strong gun safety laws that protect the people of our state. Instead, this measure puts public safety at risk." Madigan noted that the bill passed 85 to 30, which is enough votes to override a veto by the governor. Quinn and some state senators object in particular to a provision that would repeal gun control laws in Chicago and more than 200 other communities and replace them with state law. The bill passed on Friday says the state "shall issue" a permit to carry a weapon if the person passes a background check and has a valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card. It bans guns in bars where more than 50 percent of sales are from liquor, as well as at festivals. The measure allows local law enforcement to object to granting permits to people with an arrest record, and those believed to be a danger to themselves or to the public. A new seven-member licensing board would review applications. Under the measure, concealed carry would be prohibited at all schools, colleges and universities, child-care facilities, parks and playgrounds, Chicago area forest preserves, state and municipal government buildings, libraries, hospitals, mental health facilities, nursing homes, airports, stadiums, arenas, sporting events, amusement parks, zoos, museums, public transportation and government public gatherings. The bill requires 16 hours of training, including range exercises, making Illinois training the most strenuous in the nation, Madigan said. Current law bans the carrying of concealed weapons by virtually everyone except police and security guards, hunters and members of target shooting clubs. All other states allow some concealed carry. Some, such as New York, have strict requirements. Others, such as some western states, do not require permits at all. http://news.yahoo.com/illinois-house-votes-allow-residents-carry-concealed-guns-211313359.html Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on May 26, 2013, 03:26:15 am Quote Others, such as some western states, do not require permits at all. That would be Arizona, open or concealed carry, no permit required. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 29, 2013, 09:35:44 pm Battle over gun rights shifts to state courthouses; challenges to new laws mounting
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/27/battle-over-gun-rights-shifts-to-state-courthouses/ 5/27/13 The gun control battle has shifted from Capitol Hill to the states, where both sides have gone to court to challenge laws passed in the wake of December’s school shooting in Connecticut. Most recently, a coalition of gun rights groups and supporters filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport against Connecticut’s new bans on military-style, semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines — about 20 miles from Newtown, where the deaths of 20 first-graders and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary helped reignite the national debate over guns. The suit argues that the laws violate their Second Amendment rights and says that Hiller Sports, a retailer and one of the plaintiffs in the suit, has had to refund about $60,000 worth of back orders on “AR”-type firearms to its customers because wholesalers wouldn’t ship them. Similar court action has been taken against anti-gun measures passed in New York, Colorado and Maryland in the wake of the Connecticut shootings. Gun rights advocates in Maryland, however, are weighing a push to put the state’s new law before the voters in a ballot initiative prior to going to court. The group MDPetitions.com secured enough petition signatures to challenge three laws passed during the 2012 General Assembly session: legalizing same-sex marriage, providing in-state tuition for certain illegal immigrants, and the state’s congressional redistricting plan (voters ended up signing off on all three). The group’s most recent effort is to get a law passed this year repealing the death penalty in the state onto the ballot in 2014. But the National Rifle Association, which is engaged in litigation in multiple states, said court action was the right way to go on guns in Maryland, and the group ultimately opted against a ballot push. “After careful evaluation of all options to address this deeply flawed legislation, it is the position of the National Rifle Association that litigation is the best and only responsible avenue to remedy this egregious attack on the law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen of Maryland,” the group said in a recent statement. State Delegate Neil C. Parrott, Washington Republican and the founder of MDPetitions.com, said the group “does not believe that fundamental rights granted by God and acknowledged in the U.S. Constitution should be brought to referendum for popular vote.” A Sikh man sued the state of California in March on First Amendment grounds, arguing that the state’s gun control laws infringe on his right to carry the weapons he says he needs for self-defense. But the action isn’t all on the gun rights side. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence recently sued a Georgia town over legislation passed last month requiring every “head of household” to own a gun. The group argues that the town of Nelson’s requirement that residents own a firearm and ammunition violates citizens’ First, Second, and 14th Amendment rights. But Nelson officials have said that the law is mostly symbolic: There’s no real penalty, and it isn’t being enforced. There are also a number of exemptions to the law — including for those who oppose owning firearms. Both sides can claim victory in recent legal battles. A federal court ruled that the Illinois legislature must craft a concealed-carry law for the state, while a separate court upheld a law preventing firearms dealers from selling handguns to people younger than 21. The courthouse battles accompany multiple advertising campaigns seeking to put political heat on U.S. senators for their recent votes on a failed bill to expand background checks on gun buyers, an attempt to keep the issue on the front burner. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/27/battle-over-gun-rights-shifts-to-state-courthouses/#ixzz2UjtICRa2 Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 30, 2013, 12:31:22 am California St Senate Passes Series of Gun Ammunition Bills
http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Senate-passes-series-of-gun-ammunition-bills-4558332.php http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/05/ca-senate-approves-8-bills-to-regulate-guns.html#storylink=cpy The seven gun bills the Senate approved today are: SB 47 by Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco: bans so-called "bullet buttons" used to get around existing laws banning detachable magazines SB 53 by Sen. Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles: creates new state permits that require background checks for buyers of ammunition SB 374 by Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento: bans detachable magazines in rifles SB 396 by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley: prohibits possession of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition SB 567 by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara: changes the definition of certain kinds of shotguns to make them assault weapons SB 683 by Sen. Marty Block, D-San Diego: requires all gun buyers to take a firearm safety class and earn a safety certificate SB 755 by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis: increases the number of crimes - including drug addiction, chronic alcoholism and others - that result in a 10-year ban on being allowed to own a gun. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on May 30, 2013, 03:31:34 am Hmm, all democrats. Go figure!
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 30, 2013, 02:38:21 pm http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/29/Obama-To-Sign-International-Gun-Control-Treaty-On-June-3rd
5/30/13 Obama To Sign International Gun Control Treaty On June 3rd On June 3, President Barack Obama will sign the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The ATT passed in the U.N. General Assembly by a vote of 153-4 on April 2. This treaty is ostensibly aimed at putting an end to gun trafficking across international boundaries, and both Breitbart News and the NRA have argued that it will eventually require an international gun registry in order to be enforceable. The ATT also provides the executive branch of our government with broad powers for controlling which guns do and don't come into the country, and includes ambiguous language that a gun-control-friendly administration can use to its advantage. Even though Obama will sign this treaty, it is not enforceable in the U.S. until the Senate ratifies it by a two-thirds majority. For the time being, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) has pushed through an amendment opposing the treaty. However, Obama's signature will open the door for the Senate to reconsider a resolution of ratification at a future date. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 31, 2013, 10:39:34 pm http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/31/federal-court-rejects-nras-challenge-to-plan-tracking-gun-sales/
5/31/13 Federal court rejects NRA’s challenge to plan tracking gun sales Court rejects challenge to government’s requirement for gun dealers to report multiple sales of semi-automatic weapons The National Rifle Association has suffered a rare setback in its crusade to block new gun regulations after a federal appeals court allowed the U.S. government to go ahead with a plan to reduce the smuggling of semi-automatic weapons across the Mexican border. The new rules, introduced by Barack Obama under his executive powers in July 2011, require gun dealers located in states abutting the border to report to federal officials any multiple sales of semi-automatic rifles such as AK-47s to individuals within a five-day period. The administration presented the requirement as a justified move to “detect and disrupt the illegal weapons trafficking networks” operating in Mexico. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on June 01, 2013, 03:53:21 am Quote Even though Obama will sign this treaty, it is not enforceable in the U.S. until the Senate ratifies it by a two-thirds majority. Same deal as with the Kyoto Treaty. The US signed it, but never ratified it. But this one? I see it being ratified, and pronto, because it looks to me like "they" finally have enough on their side to control the government as they choose, and to me it looks like the full court press is on for globalization. Title: The People respond to Politicians who respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 04, 2013, 11:08:19 am Colorado Democrat recalled for anti-gun vote
Citizen-led petitions gather double number of required signatures The organizers of an effort to recall Colorado Senate President John Morse turned in Monday more than twice the number of signatures required to force a special election, possibly setting the stage for an expensive, national battle over gun control. If the signatures are determined to be valid and survive a court challenge, it’s likely voters in Morse’s Senate district will decide at a special election in September whether to oust the Colorado Springs Democrat. Morse’s support of gun-control legislation in the 2013 session as well as his leadership style sparked the recall effort. Read the full story › http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23380042/battle-ahead-colorado-democrat-john-morse-fights-gun Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 04, 2013, 11:32:15 am Again, they're waiting until NOW to do these things? I'm shocked these same citizens didn't lead a mass recall on Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, and Mitt Romney when they pushed through strict gun control laws in their days. Again, they missed the train.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8D6Ia2nSMcM Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 12, 2013, 07:15:43 pm http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/biden-bloomberg-try-again-guns-6-months-newtown-183419637.html
Biden, Bloomberg try again on guns 6 months after Newtown 6/12/13 Vice President Joe Biden is renewing his push for gun-control legislation with an event slated for Tuesday, marking the first time the White House has held an event on guns since its legislative push for background checks failed in the Senate in April. A Biden aide declined to give any details about the event, which was first reported by Politico. "The commitment of this president and the vice president to taking action to reduce gun violence is as strong today as it was at the beginning of the year and in the wake of Newtown," White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Wednesday. The failed bipartisan bill—crafted by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa.—would have extended background checks to all commercial gun purchases, preventing people with criminal records from buying guns. President Barack Obama called its failure "shameful" and vowed to continue the fight for the legislation; though, since then the White House has remained largely silent on the issue. It's unlikely that the Republican-controlled House would ever support a similar measure. Meanwhile, the gun-control group backed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is launching a 100-day bus tour of 25 states on Friday, exactly six months after the shootings that killed 20 children and six educators in Newtown, Conn. The bus tour, organized by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, kicks off in Newtown and will include family members of the victims from that town as well as from other mass shootings. The tour, called "No More Names: The National Drive to Reduce Gun Violence," will travel to states to thank senators who supported the failed background check bill, as well as to pressure senators who voted against it. For example, it will stop in Maine to thank Republican Sen. Susan Collins for backing the reform, the tour's organizers told reporters on Wednesday. Bloomberg, the country's most influential gun-control advocate, will also send a personal letter to hundreds of deep-pocketed New York donors on Wednesday to ask them to withhold cash from the four Democratic senators who did not support the background check bill in April, The New York Times reported. Those senators are Max Baucus, Mark Begich, Heidi Heitkamp and Mark Pryor. Even though their national efforts failed, gun-control advocates have won important state-level legislative victories in Connecticut, Colorado, New York and Nevada in the past six months. Mark Glaze, the executive director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said the group has to "rebuild grass roots on this issue" to effectively counter the National Rifle Association's influence. Some Newtown families have also traveled to the Hill to meet with lawmakers this week about gun legislation. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 12, 2013, 10:48:11 pm http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/12/18921437-newtown-families-return-to-hill-as-administration-restarts-gun-control-push?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=5
6/12/13 Newtown families return to Hill as administration restarts gun control push The Obama administration will try to revive its push for tighter restrictions on firearms, almost two months after legislation seen as the best hope for gun control went down to defeat in the Senate. The effort got an extra boost on Wednesday as families of children and educators killed at Newtown returned to Capitol Hill ahead of the six-month anniversary of the shootings to plead with lawmakers not to forget their loved ones. "It's been the longest six months of my entire life, but also the shortest. Time becomes completely irrelevant in some respects," said Nicole Hockley, who lost her son, six-year-old Dylan, in the Dec. 14 shooting. "Six months, six minutes, six years -- a marathon already," said Bill Sherlach, who lost his wife. "We really have no choice, because I'll spend the rest of my life without my wife." Advertise | AdChoices They spoke during a meeting with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who spearheaded the background check compromise that failed to pass the Senate in April. They insist that momentum for new gun control laws hasn't faded. But Congress is largely consumed by an emerging immigration reform debate -- and Manchin couldn't say whether there would be another gun vote this year, or even before the end of this congressional session at the end of 2014. Still, Vice President Joe Biden has vowed to keep pushing for new legislation, inviting gun violence groups to a meeting at the White House on June 17. “I personally haven’t given up, nor has the president,” Biden told reporters on Capitol Hill on Monday. The administration’s renewed effort will be fought on several fronts: at the White House, on Capitol Hill, and in key states and congressional districts throughout the country. The families also met today with House GOP leaders, whose discretion will be key in determining whether any gun proposal even comes up for a vote in the House, should a bill make it out of the Senate. “The families have asked to meet with us,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said on Wednesday ahead of the meeting. “Our hearts and souls go out to these families and the tragedy they've all been through.” It's the first time Boehner will meet with the Newtown families. On Thursday, the families will hold a press conference outside of the Capitol with senior lawmakers to mark the six-month anniversary of the shootings. It’s unclear, though, whether the intervening two months since the last vote in Congress on gun control has changed the politics of the issue very much. In that vote, the Senate fell six votes short of the 60 they needed to advance a more modest, bipartisan gun control proposal that would have expanded background checks to firearms sales online and at gun shows. Gone from the package were proposed bans on assault weapons, and high-capacity magazines. The proposal that the Senate scuttled remains broadly popular; a New York Times/CBS News poll earlier this month found that 69 percent of Americans – including 58 percent of Republicans – said that Congress should pass the expanded background check proposal if it comes up for another vote. In the two months since the vote, proponents of gun control have sought to ratchet up the pressure on key lawmakers. Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the pro-gun control group founded by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, ran ads targeting key senators like Mark Pryor, D-Ark., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., for voting against the bipartisan proposal (“Manchin-Toomey”) in April. The results have been mixed. In Pryor’s case, he sought to turn the attack back toward his advantage, launching his own re-election campaign ad declaring his independence from “the mayor of New York City.” Ayotte became more of a lightning rod, as gun control advocates swarmed her town hall meetings during a recess, while the National Rifle Association ran ads in her state lionizing the first-term senator. Bloomberg’s group makes up the third front on which the renewed push for gun control will be fought. Mayors Against Illegal Guns announced Wednesday that it planned a summer bus tour that would make at least 25 stops in key states and districts across the country, with the goal of galvanizing support for new gun control proposals. “When senators vote down a bill with such overwhelming support among the public, there is going to be a sense of outrage. And we've seen that outrage since April 17,” said John Feinblatt, an adviser to Bloomberg. “I think Americans feel as though Congress did not represent them on April 17.” Bloomberg is also looking to target lawmakers where it maybe hurts the most: their bank accounts. The mayor wrote Democratic donors in New York – one of the largest wellsprings of campaign donations – urging them to refuse supporting Democratic senators who had voted against the Manchin-Toomey proposal. “It is usual practice for elected officials all over this country to make New York once of their first stops in scooping up donations for their campaigns,” Feinblatt said. “Mayor Bloomberg thought it was important that Donors in New York be made aware of votes that senators took on April 17 to deny the Manchin-Toomey bill.” Manchin said that Bloomberg's efforts weren't as effective as they could be, though he declined to criticize the mayor's efforts. "I need help in going into gun regions such as West Virginia and all over this country to tell the law abiding gun owners actually what this will do for them," Manchin said. "There's going to be an election in 2014 - that's the time." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 16, 2013, 12:32:43 pm When we read these news articles, sometimes as Christians we really have to be discerning - why weren't there any record gun sales like this when Reagan, George HW, and Romney pushed for strict gun control measures? Wasn't the recent massive gun control bill by Obama defeated in the Senate recently, including HARRY REID voting AGAINST it?
Pt being that it seems like the Illuminati minions are doing all they can to push as many buttons to ignite Civil War/Martial Law in this country - if this happens, it's as if Obama himself didn't fire a shot. Just putting things into perspective here - if Obama decides to go for gun confiscation, then there would be blood on the streets like never before, and even Obama himself knows it. Like the old saying goes, "He who fires the first shot loses". Smith & Wesson gun sales hit an all-time high in year after mass shootings At six-month anniversary of Newtown shooting, guns manufacturer reports its sales are up 43% over last year http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/14/smith-wesson-gun-sales-newtown 6/14/13 Gun sales at Smith & Wesson have hit an all-time high during a year marked by some of the most horrific acts of gun violence in US history. The arms manufacturer reported this week that sales for the year ending 30 April had hit a record $588m, a 43% year-on-year rise. Smith & Wesson said fourth-quarter sales were up 38% year-on-year to $179m. It told investors it expects its first-quarter financial results to top market expectations and is planning to buy back $100m of its shares. US gun sales are hard to track, but one of the most reliable figures comes from the number of requests for background checks, an FBI-required precursor to obtaining a gun licence. Nine of the 10 days with the most daily requests for background checks ever recorded occurred after December's massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school. The week after set a new record for background checks. CBS Connecticut reported that permit applications in Newtown itself more than doubled in the three months following the killings. Retailers also reported a spike in gun sales after James Holmes shot dead 12 people and injured 58 at a screening of the Dark Knight Rises in a Colorado cinema in July. Sales soared again after Barack Obama's re-election in November as buyers feared a clampdown on sales, especially on assault weapons. Smith & Wesson will update investors on sales on 25 June. Its shares rose on the announcement of the buybacks to a three-month high of just under $10. But the US's spate of gun violence has also triggered a backlash among some investors. California State Teachers' Retirement System (CalSTRS), a $154bn pension fund, announced last year it would sell off its holding in Freedom Group, manufacturer of the rifle used in the Newtown shooting. Cerberus Capital Management, the private equity group, also announced it was selling its interest in Freedom Group. "It is apparent that the Sandy Hook tragedy was a watershed event that has raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level," Cerberus said in a statement last December. Four months later it emerged that Cerberus's billionaire founder Stephen Feinberg was considering making a bid for Freedom Group, which makes the Bushmaster rifles, one of which was used to kill 20 children and six adults at the school. The company has reportedly struggled to find another buyer. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on June 17, 2013, 03:07:46 am Quote US gun sales are hard to track, but one of the most reliable figures comes from the number of requests for background checks, an FBI-required precursor to obtaining a gun licence. See, that isn't even close to the real numbers. Consider how many guns are involved in private, unreported deals in state's that don't require permits, federal background checks, etc. Just the opposite, the FBI numbers are some of the most UNRELIABLE numbers out there, because the feds are the ones who want to restrict guns, so out of the box they cannot be trusted. And the Cerberus/Freedom Group deal? Talk about sketchy at best. Goings on that defy logic and reason. The "anti-gun lobby" isn't who we think they are apparently. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 21, 2013, 01:10:00 pm Well, the NRA admitted their fight for gun rights is the NEW "culture war"(as the "culture wars" on socially conservative issues have pretty much passed)...Had a feeling that the recent gun control bill that got defeated in the Senate wasn't going to go away...
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/alert/?alertid=62740076 Senators Hoeven and Corker Wave the White Flag of Surrender Gun owners must oppose their sell-out amendment Senators John Hoeven (R-ND) and Bob Corker (R-TN) have made anti-gun New York Senator Chuck Schumer a very happy man. They are frantically working to give Schumer the 70 votes he needs to send his amnesty bill to the House with momentum. And, if that bill were to be signed into law, it would add 8.4 million anti-gun voters to the rolls, and make gun registration, bans, and confiscation inevitable within 20 years. Here’s where we stand: Schumer’s original slimy deal was supposed to be this: We will add 8.4 million anti-gun Democratic voters to the rolls, but, in exchange, we will secure the border. It would supposedly do this by more fence and more federal agents. Now the partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has come back with its numbers: On the one hand, 8 million (mostly anti-gun) illegal immigrants would be eligible for citizenship. And these are the figures from the liberal CBO! On the other hand, said the CBO, illegal immigration would remain largely unaffected by the bill’s fencing and agents, going down a paltry 25%. It was pretty apparent that Senate Republican negotiators had lost their shirts, even if you trust the liberal CBO. So Hoeven and Corker began to negotiate over a path to pass Schumer’s anti-gun bill with a super-majority. A little more fence. A few more agents. A more Orwellian E-Verify system. But the big issue was whether to hold up citizenship for the 8.4 million anti-gun voters until illegal immigration had demonstrably been reduced by 90%. Schumer & Co. adamantly refused to agree to this. Why? If Schumer had any expectation that the Obama administration was going to tighten the border, why would he be so averse to guaranteeing that result? It was obvious to everyone that Schumer didn’t expect the border to ever be secure, and that was the reason he wasn’t willing to condition his 8.4 million anti-gun voters on quantifiable border security. So what did Corker and Hoeven do? They agreed to turn the 90% border security REQUIREMENT into a 90% border security non-binding GOAL. It should have told them something that every liberal analyst in town has been deliriously happy over the Hoeven-Corker sell-out. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on June 21, 2013, 02:20:31 pm Wow.
I cannot imagine what it would be like to be around those people in Washington. I thank God I'm not. I honestly believe it would grieve the Spirit just being in the area. There has been some real eye-openers over the last couple days. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 01, 2013, 11:17:55 am El Dorado Sheriff’s Fight With Feds Likely Over Residents Carrying Guns
The fight that has the El Dorado County sheriff planning to revoke a federal agency’s enforcement power in his county is apparently over residents’ rights to carry guns. Cory Ward is an avid outdoorsman who frequents the El Dorado National forest. But he’s concerned this paradise could turn into a police state. “I have felt intimidated,” he said. He’s got a long list of complaints against federal officers who patrol the forest. “They want to know what you’re doing here, where you’re going, do you have any firearms on board.” It appears this exploding confrontation between Sheriff John D’Agostini and the U.S. Forest service may come down to guns, and the right to carry them, and whether U.S. citizens are allowed to bring them onto federal land. The sheriff’s department says they’ve received more than 50 complaints from people just out enjoying the woods when they were stopped by an overly aggressive forest service officer. Some of these experiences have been posted on Internet chat rooms with people demanding the sheriff get involved. And last week, he pulled the federal officers’ powers to enforce state laws in his jurisdiction, effective July 22. A U.S Forest Service spokesman said the agency met with the sheriff Wednesday to try and work out their differences. “It hasn’t happened anywhere else in this state,” said John Heil. “We hope that the relationship will continue and we will look for ways to improve.” But as for Cory, he just wants to enjoy the forest without fearing the feds. “This is your land, this is my land, this is everybody’s land,” he said, “And we don’t want to come here anymore.” The forest service said it will affect the seven forest service officers who patrol the area, though they’ll still be able to enforce federal laws and restrictions. http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/06/27/el-dorado-sheriffs-fight-with-feds-likely-over-residents-carrying-guns/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on July 01, 2013, 03:11:44 pm That's an example of the problems with the attitude of the federal government concerning "federal lands".
The federal level has this attitude that they are the final say on all things American, and they aren't, constitutionally speaking. There is a reason why federal and state levels are defined in the Constitution. Yes, the feds can "own land", but it's still the property of "We the People". In effect, the people have given federal officials power of attorney to "represent" the land owners, the American public. But the evil that exists in government has driven some to interpret law as they please, and now we have a federal level of government that has taken an attitude of being superior to the states, and the wishes of the people. Some in government have the attitude and act accordingly, that they being "experts", know "what's best for the greater good". And that mentality is pretty much socialism in a nutshell. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 12, 2013, 09:48:26 pm http://www.examiner.com/article/judge-kidd-makes-injunction-against-miss-gun-law-permanent
Judge Kidd makes injunction against Miss. gun law permanent 7/12/13 Claiming Mississippi's House Bill 2 clarification of "concealed" is "unconstitutionally vague," Hinds Country Circuit Court Judge Winston L. Kidd today placed a permanent injunction on the law to keep it from going into effect in his Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunctive Relief. “[T]he Court will grant an Injunction to delay the effect of House Bill 2 until such time as the Mississippi Legislature amends or clarifies House Bill 2 during the next legislative Session as it relates to a citizen's right to openly carry a weapon in a holster without requiring a permit,” Kidd ruled. “[The bill] shall not take effect until such time as the Mississippi Legislature reviews, amends or clarifies House Bill 2 to accomplish its intended purpose.” Gun Rights Examiner reported at the end of last month how executive, legislative and judicial checks and balances had been bypassed in favor of agenda-driven anti-gun activism. Readers were also informed when state Attorney General petitioned the state Supreme Court to overturn Kidd's temporary restraining order, and how the court then refused to undo that block. Also reported in this column was the complaint of a pro-gun Hinds County constable who was included as a plaintiff opposing implementation of the law against his express wishes, and who is now looking to file bar complaints against the attorneys who put his name on their filing. Inquiries have been sent out to determine what the next step by those defending the right to keep and bear arms will be. With the timing of a Friday ruling, it may be too late to expect further responses today. A new GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" column is now online. All aboard for the Bloomberg bus bust. Click here to read "Magical Misery Tour.” If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream media, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on July 13, 2013, 01:49:22 am Quote Also reported in this column was the complaint of a pro-gun Hinds County constable who was included as a plaintiff opposing implementation of the law against his express wishes, and who is now looking to file bar complaints against the attorneys who put his name on their filing. The lawyers that did that should be disbarred. You simply cannot do that. It's a false filing. Obviously, they were trying to game the situation, to get an unfair advantage, and that to me seems outright illegal. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 29, 2013, 04:11:30 pm http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-now-throws-roadblock-those-illinois-looking-190621722.html
Federal Judge Now Throws Up Roadblock for Those In Illinois Looking to Immediately Carry Concealed Weapons 7/29/13 ST. LOUIS (AP) -- A federal judge has rejected a push by gun rights advocates to let Illinois residents immediately tote firearms in public instead of waiting months for the state to outline the permitting process under its new concealed carry law. U.S. District Judge William Stiehl on Friday threw out the lawsuit filed in East St. Louis by Mary Shepard and the Illinois State Rifle Association, siding with Illinois in ruling the suit moot. Under the last-in-the-nation concealed carry law, passed by the General Assembly July 9 against Gov. Pat Quinn's vehement objections, Illinois State Police have 180 days to set up a program before accepting applications, plus an additional 90 days to process the forms. Shepard, in court filings, called such a delay unreasonable and insisted it "constitutes an unacceptable perpetuation of the defendants' infringement of the Second Amendment rights." While noting she wasn't challenging elements of the new permitting process, Shepard said her issue was over "the complete ban on carrying firearms that continues to exist until the permitting process is up and running." But Stiehl's 10-page ruling agreed with the position of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office: Challenging the legality of the span state police have to set up the program would require Shepard and the state rifle group to file a new complaint spelling out why such a wait is onerous or illegal. It was not immediately clear Monday whether Shepard or the rifle association planned to pursue the matter further. Messages left with one of their attorneys, William Howard, were not immediately returned. A message seeking comment also was left with Todd Vandemyde, a National Rifle Association lobbyist in Illinois. Madigan spokeswoman Maura Possley told The Associated Press that office may have a public response to Stiehl's ruling later Monday. In passing the concealed carry measure, lawmakers narrowly beat a deadline set by the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which last December ruled the state's ban on public possession of handguns unconstitutional. Madigan's office had argued that Shepard's lawsuit, which first helped bring about the 7th Circuit's decision, challenged the state's blanket prohibition on carrying a loaded firearm on public - something the new law now allows. "The fact that this time period for establishing the permitting process is specified in the statute does not mean that it actually will take that amount of time for the state police to complete the process," Stiehl wrote. Shepard, of Cobden in southern Illinois, was 69 years old in 2009 when she was beaten by an intruder and left for dead. She has said that had she not been barred from carrying a gun, she could have thwarted the attack. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 30, 2013, 06:31:40 am Ark. district arming more than 20 teachers, staff
As Cheyne Dougan rounded the corner at Clarksville High School, he saw three students on the floor moaning and crying. In a split-second, two more ran out of a nearby classroom. "He's got a gun," one of them shouted as Dougan approached with his pistol drawn. Inside, he found one student holding another at gunpoint. Dougan aimed and fired three rounds at the gunman. Preparing for such scenarios has become common for police after a school shooting in Connecticut last December left 20 children and six teachers dead. But Dougan is no policeman. He's the assistant principal of this school in Arkansas, and when classes resume in August, he will walk the halls with a 9 mm handgun. Dougan is among more than 20 teachers, administrators and other school employees in this town who will carry concealed weapons throughout the school day, making use of a little-known Arkansas law that allows licensed, armed security guards on campus. After undergoing 53 hours of training, Dougan and other teachers at the school will be considered guards. "The plan we've been given in the past is `Well, lock your doors, turn off your lights and hope for the best,'" Superintendent David Hopkins said. But as deadly incidents continued to happen in schools, he explained, the district decided, "That's not a plan." After the Connecticut attack, the idea of arming schoolhouses against gunmen was hotly debated across the country. The National Rifle Association declared it the best response to serious threats. But even in the most conservative states, most proposals faltered in the face of resistance from educators or warnings from insurance companies that schools would face higher premiums. In strongly conservative Arkansas, where gun ownership is common and gun laws are permissive, no school district had ever used the law to arm teachers on the job, according to the state Department of Education. The closest was the Lake Hamilton School District in Garland County, which for years has kept several guns locked up in case of emergency. Only a handful of trained administrators - not teachers - have access to the weapons. Clarksville, a community of 9,200 people about 100 miles northwest of Little Rock, is going further. Home to an annual peach festival, the town isn't known for having dangerous schools. But Hopkins said he faced a flood of calls from parents worried about safety after the attack last year at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. Hopkins said he and other school leaders didn't see why the district couldn't rely on its own staff and teachers to protect students rather than hire someone. "We're not tying our money up in a guard 24/7 that we won't have to have unless something happens. We've got these people who are already hired and using them in other areas," Hopkins said. "Hopefully we'll never have to use them as a security guard." State officials are not blocking Clarksville's plan, but Arkansas Education Commissioner Tom Kimbrell is opposed to the idea of arming teachers and staff. He prefers to hire law enforcement officers as school resource officers. There are other dissenters, too. Donna Morey, former president of the Arkansas Education Association, called the idea of arming teachers "awful." The risk of a student accidentally getting shot or obtaining a gun outweighs any benefits, she said. "We just think educators should be in the business of educating students, not carrying a weapon," Morey said. Participants in the program are given a one-time $1,100 stipend to purchase a handgun and holster. Hopkins said the district is paying about $50,000 for ammunition and for training by Nighthawk Custom Training Academy, a private training facility in northwest Arkansas. The Nighthawk training includes drills like the one Dougan participated in, with various role-playing scenarios involving shooters on campus. Dougan and other teachers in the program practiced using "airsoft" pellet guns, with students wearing protective facemasks and jackets. "There's pressure on you, because you're shooting real bullets if this actually happened," said Dougan, who has three children attending Clarksville schools. "I was nervous to start, but once it started and I was going through what they had taught us, it just took over." The training is narrowly tailored for teachers to respond to shooters on campus. "That teacher is going to respond to one thing and one thing alone, and that's someone is in the building either actively or attempting to kill people," Jon Hodoway, director of training for Nighthawk. "That's it. They're not going to enforce the law. They're not going to make traffic stops. If somebody is outside acting the fool, they're going to call the police." Using students as actors helps trainers re-create the environment that teachers and staff would face in a typical school shooting, Hodoway explained. The students who participated in the exercise were children of the teachers and staff who were being trained. Sydney Whitkanack, who will enter seventh grade this fall, said she's grown up around firearms and doesn't mind if teachers or staff are armed at school. "If they're concealed, then it's no big deal," said Whitkanack, who was an actor in the training scenario. "It's not like someone's going to know `Oh, they have a firearm.'" The district will post signs at each school about the armed guards, but the identities of faculty and staff carrying weapons will be kept secret, Hopkins said. Those who participate in the program will continue to receive regular training, he said. Sherry Wommack said the program is one reason she's taking her son, an incoming eighth-grader, out of Clarksville's schools before the school year begins. Wommack said she doesn't believe teachers should make life-or-death choices involving students. "I think police officers are trained to make those decisions, not teachers," Wommack said. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ARMING_TEACHERS?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-30-03-10-57 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 30, 2013, 06:52:33 am You know, I wonder why they're waiting until NOW to do all of this? Why wasn't any of this going on when George W. was President?
If Mitt Romney were in office instead, strict gun control measures would have quietly been pushed through already b/c the GOP base of "evangelicals" and "conservatives" would have turned a blind eye to all of this(and for that matter too, you wouldn't hear any chirps of him letting Obamacare stand). It happened under Reagan when he pushed a ban on assault weapons. It seems like Obama is the perfect puppet to get civil unrest/Martial Law ignited in this country. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 01, 2013, 09:15:57 am http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-01/new-jersey-gun-carrying-limits-upheld-by-appeals-court.html?cmpid=yhoo
7/31/13 New Jersey Gun-Carrying Limits Upheld by Appeals Court New Jersey’s law requiring residents show a “justifiable need” to get a permit to carry a handgun in public was upheld by a federal appeals court. A mandate that residents demonstrate an “urgent necessity for self-protection” to get authorization to publicly carry a handgun doesn’t run afoul of U.S. constitutional protections of the right to bear firearms, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled yesterday. “The justifiable need standard is a longstanding regulation that enjoys presumptive constitutionality,” the panel wrote. The ruling comes more than four months after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed a similar Second Amendment challenge to New York state’s requirement that people wishing to carry a handgun in public show a special need for protection. Alan Gura, an Alexandria, Virginia, attorney who represented New Jersey residents challenging the state’s gun-permit law, didn’t immediately return a call after regular business hours yesterday seeking comment on the ruling. In the 2010 lawsuit in federal court in New Jersey, four state residents, along with the Second Amendment Foundation Inc. and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc., argued the justifiable-need standard violated their constitutional rights. ‘Presumptively Lawful’ The four residents had been denied a permit because they couldn’t show they met the standard for carrying a gun in public. A lower-court judge threw out the suit. The appellate judges upheld that ruling, finding the New Jersey permit law was a “presumptively lawful, longstanding regulation and therefore does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee.” The New Jersey case is part of a gun-policy debate raging in Washington and statehouses across the country in the wake of the Dec. 14 school school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. The deaths of 20 first graders and six educators unleashed a flurry of legislative activity around the country, often dividing lawmakers along partisan lines. New restrictions on guns have passed in Connecticut, New York, Colorado and Maryland, all of which are led by Democrats. More states have moved in the opposite direction: Six states relaxed restrictions, including those on carrying guns into churches, schools or workplace parking lots. In 1981, just three states -- Maine, Washington and Vermont -- let residents carry weapons in public without giving a reason. Today, about 40 states do. The New Jersey case is Drake v. Filko, 12-1150, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Philadelphia). The lower-court case is Muller v. Maenza, 2:10-cv-06110, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey (Newark). Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on August 01, 2013, 01:54:40 pm Quote A mandate that residents demonstrate an “urgent necessity for self-protection” to get authorization to publicly carry a handgun doesn’t run afoul of U.S. constitutional protections of the right to bear firearms, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled yesterday. I would expect them to rule that way, seeing the feds already have had the courts rule the government is allowed to "restrict" guns. Still doesn't mean it's constitutional, regardless of what the sell out courts rule. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 23, 2013, 06:30:06 pm http://news.yahoo.com/georgia-city-backs-off-mandatory-gun-ownership-181833727.html
Georgia city backs off on mandatory gun ownership 8/23/13 ATLANTA (AP) — A Georgia city is backing off its law that required heads of households to own a gun and ammunition, which leaders said was meant to warn would-be burglars and to send a message to the federal government about gun ownership. The city council in Nelson, a city of about 1,300 residents 50 miles north of Atlanta, passed the Family Protection Ordinance on April 1. About a month later, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed a federal lawsuit against the city and council members challenging its constitutionality. In a joint court filing Thursday, the Brady Center and the city submitted a settlement agreement to the federal judge in Gainesville. The city agreed to add language saying the law is not enforceable, that it will not be enforced and that anyone who violates it will not be subject to any penalty. "We're very pleased with the settlement," said lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center. "We were able to accomplish everything we wanted to in this lawsuit." City manager Brandy Edwards said the city had no comment on the settlement and confirmed no one had been charged under the ordinance. The measure requires every head of household to own a gun and ammunition to "provide for the emergency management of the city" and to "provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants." The ordinance exempted convicted felons, those who can't afford a gun and those who suffer from certain physical or mental disabilities, as well as anyone who conscientiously objects to owning guns because of their beliefs or religious doctrine. City leaders and the police chief, who's the only law enforcement officer in town, said during the meeting when the ordinance was passed that they had no intention of enforcing it. The Brady Center argued that someone who doesn't conscientiously oppose gun ownership but who simply doesn't want to own a weapon wouldn't be exempt and that would be a violation of the person's constitutional rights. The national gun control group also argued there was no guarantee that the ordinance wouldn't be enforced in the future. The Brady Center also sought to discourage other municipal governments from following Nelson's lead as the town of Nucla, Colo., did in May. "Nelson clearly saw the writing on the wall, and hopefully this will be a message to other communities that consider enacting this sort of misguided legislation," Lowy said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on August 24, 2013, 03:16:14 am Quote "We're very pleased with the settlement," said lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center. "We were able to accomplish everything we wanted to in this lawsuit." A PRIVATE group takes on a small town with one police officer, taking them to federal court, which no doubt the town has no funds to defend themselves in a federal case, so they "cave", all in what I believe was a full blown set up from the start. If that isn't federally-funded strong arm tactics, I don't know what is. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 29, 2013, 10:51:47 am http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-obama-offers-gun-control-steps-130058025--politics.html
AP Exclusive: Obama offers new gun control steps 8/29/13 WASHINGTON (AP) — Striving to take action where Congress would not, the Obama administration announced new steps Thursday on gun control, curbing the import of military surplus weapons and proposing to close a little-known loophole that lets felons and others circumvent background checks by registering guns to corporations. Four months after a gun control drive collapsed spectacularly in the Senate, President Barack Obama added two more executive actions to a list of 23 steps the White House determined Obama could take on his own to reduce gun violence. With the political world focused on Mideast tensions and looming fiscal battles, the move signaled Obama's intent to show he hasn't lost sight of a cause he took up after 20 first graders and six adults were gunned down last year in an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. One new policy will end a government practice that lets military weapons, sold or donated by the U.S. to allies, be reimported into the U.S. by private entities, where some may end up on the streets. The White House said the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to be reimported since 2005; under the new policy, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms. The Obama administration is also proposing a federal rule to stop those who would be ineligible to pass a background check from skirting the law by registering a gun to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks as individuals if they want to register guns. Vice President Joe Biden, Obama's point-man on gun control after the Newtown tragedy thrust guns into the national spotlight, was set to unveil the new actions Thursday at the White House. The event in the Roosevelt Room will also mark the ceremonial swearing-in for Todd Jones, whose confirmation to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives after six years of political wrangling to fill that position was another of Obama's post-Newtown priorities. A Senate deal to approve the president's pending nominations after Democrats threatened to change Senate rules cleared the way for Jones' confirmation last month. Still out of reach for Obama were the steps that gun control advocates and the administration's own review say could most effectively combat gun violence in the U.S., like an assault weapons ban and fewer exceptions for background checks for individual sales. Only Congress can act on those fronts. Although Obama and Biden have said the fight is not over, there is scant evidence that there is more support for gun control legislation than there was in April, when efforts died in the Senate amid staunch opposition from the National Rifle Association and most Republican senators. "Sooner or later, we are going to get this right," Obama said that day in the White House Rose Garden, with the families of Newtown victims and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords — herself a victim of a gunman — at his side. "The memories of these children demand it, and so do the American people," the president said at the time. In the months following the Senate vote, Biden has claimed that at a handful of lawmakers who opposed expanded background checks have told him privately they've changed their minds and want another chance. But Biden and White House officials have not named any of those lawmakers. These days, Obama mentions gun control with far less regularity than when it appeared the Senate was poised to take action, although Obama did meet Tuesday with 18 city mayors to discuss ways to contain youth violence. And with immigration and pressing fiscal issues dominating Congress' agenda, the prospects for reviving gun legislation appear negligible. With Jones' confirmation at ATF, the White House has completed or made significant progress on all but one of the 23 executive actions Obama had previously ordered in January, the White House said. Still lingering is an effort to finalize regulations to require insurers to cover mental health at parity with medical benefits, although the White House said that it is committed to making that happen by the end of 2013. The new rules for guns registered to corporations will follow the traditional regulatory process, with a 90-day comment period before ATF reviews suggestions and finalizes the rule. Last year, ATF received 39,000 requests to register guns to corporations and trusts. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 04, 2013, 07:07:38 am This is disturbing, but what do you expect
Chicago Police Superintendent Threatens To Murder Concealed Carry Permit Holders McCarthy said. “I don’t care if they’re licensed legal firearms, people who are not highly trained… putting guns in their hands is a recipe for disaster. So I’ll train our officers that there is a concealed carry law, but when somebody turns with a firearm in their hand the officer does not have an obligation to wait to get shot to return fire and we’re going to have tragedies as a result of that. I’m telling you right up front.” McCarthy doesn’t just seem to think it may happen; he almost seems to look look forward to it with some sort of vindictive wrath. http://www.resistthetyranny.com/chicago-police-superintendent-threatens-to-murder-concealed-carry-permit-holders/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on September 04, 2013, 12:04:08 pm So he's saying they'll shoot first, ask questions later. Typical.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 11, 2013, 05:50:46 am Countdown to Gun, Magazine & Ammo Confiscation in California : 4…3…2…1
They are now coming for your guns, your magazines, your money, and your home protection. I’m somewhat surprised they are not after your blood, though indirectly they are. In a move that should have surprised no one, a gaggle of California’s elite (or should I say elitist) legislators dumped a stack of gun control bills into the legislative hopper this session. Together these bills seek to ban detachable magazine rifles (period), ban and confiscate existing factory magazines with capacities greater than ten rounds (period), ban traditional hunting ammunition, ban mail order sales of all ammunition, and require government approval to buy any ammunition at all. I’ll break down this insanity in a minute, but ponder for a moment how these laws will affect your average gang member. Thinking … thinking … I couldn’t come up with anything, either. Not letting a good crisis go to waste, senators mainly from urban areas where guns laws have largely disarmed the public (though not the criminals) dropped a slew of new proposals this year that are designed to completely eliminate some of your rights while chiseling away at the core of the Second Amendment by making exercising your rights excessively burdensome. If passed, there will be confiscations (according to the Senator from Oakland), you will jump dog-like through legal hoops to own a handgun (proclaims the Senator from San Diego) and you will have to say goodbye to your hunting rifles (commandeth the Senator from Sacramento). Let’s review the worst of the bunch, though nearly nothing in the stack of proposed legislation can be considered “good.” The Senate’s President (Pro-Tem) Steinberg has authored a bill to eliminate the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation and possession of semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines. No more mini-14s, no more ARs, no more M1s, and say goodbye to your Remington 750 for deer hunting. Naturally, Steinberg blames the “gun industry” for “[flooding] our communities with rapid-reload battlefield weapons.” None of Steinberg’s biographies note military service, so perhaps he can be forgiven for not knowing a hunting rifle from a soldier’s best friend. Steinberg’s demonstrable ignorance aside, the goal is clear – if it is a rifle and has a detachable magazine, then forget about owning one. Seemingly not to be outdone, Oakland-area Senator Loni Hancock is pushing to ban your standard capacity magazines that hold more than ten rounds – anything over that, and any kits that facilitate the expansion of the magazine size will be banned. During the Senators’ gang-like press conference earlier this year, Hancock bluntly stated that the law would require outright confiscation of all such magazines. It must have escaped her observation, but street criminals (mainly gang members and the ones responsible for most Oakland homicides) prefer revolvers and smaller capacity 9mm pistols due to their concealability. Amusingly, instead of showcasing California criminals, Senate press materials used Tucson lunatic Jared Loughner as their bogus bogyman. You would think that being from Oakland she could find more locally-relevant material. Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson from the otherwise pleasant town of Santa Barbara wants to redefine firearms in general by inventing the “assault shotguns” classification. Jackson wants to add more shotguns to the list of “bad” guns, despite these firearms rarely being used in homicides. If your shotgun uses a cylinder instead of a tube to store shells, prepare to surrender it, even if both firearms have the same capacity. If you track and hunt with a combo rifle/shotgun, tell your kids they won’t have the privilege to inherit yours. In the same effluvium stream of press fodder, senators specifically equated the “Circuit Judge” sporting arm with the vilified “Street Sweeper”. Somehow the similarity is illusive to everyone outside of Loni’s chambers. San Diego’s Senator, Marty Block, doubled down. Marty intends to put you through extended safety training to purchase a rifle, further expanding the time between obtaining a self-defense firearm and confronting an attacker. The training is allegedly for safety, but according to the Center For Disease Control – the official mortality statisticians – firearm accidents now rank at the bottom of accidental deaths (odds are that more children die in San Diego swimming pools than from gun accidents given that in the last CDC reporting year 64 California kids drowned while only 62 kids across the entire United States we accidentally shot). Not content to make it difficult to acquire a handgun, Marty wants to make lending your gun to someone for self-defense virtually impossible. His legislation makes it illegal to loan gun in many common situations. When your daughter is being harassed by her estranged husband, but faces a training demonstration requirement before she can lawfully possess it, you won’t be allowed to lend her your spare revolver, despite the fact that you taught your daughter to shoot and taught her gun safety as well. But Marty insists he is looking out for her. Sadly, there is more. But the battle lines have been drawn. Given their way, you will have to climb legal mountains to protect your family, be licensed to buy ammo should you actually obtain a gun, and forfeit your rifles and shotguns once the definition of “assault weapon” is stretched beyond all rationality. This week marks the final week of the 2013 legislative session. In addition to these ill-conceived proposals, several other anti-gun bills and anti-hunting bills with serious consequences for gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters are awaiting their final vote on the floors of the state Senate and Assembly. These misguided anti-gun/anti-hunting bills could be up for a final vote any day this week. For a complete list of bills requiring immediate action, and information on how to contact your representatives, click here. The deadline for each bill to have finally passed both houses of the California legislature is September 13. Bills that make it out of the legislature on or before that date will then move to Governor Brown’s desk, and he will have until October 13 2013 to sign or veto each bill. Bills that are signed into law will become operative on January 1, 2014, unless a later date is specified in the law. For now, gun owners must continue to call, write, fax, and e-mail their legislative representatives. Flooding legislative offices with phone calls and written letters is particularly effective. If you have already written a letter on each bill, consider writing another. After September 13, it will then be time to put pressure on the Governor to veto the anti-gun bills that have made it through the legislature. Although it has been rumored that the Democrats have a “supermajority” that will allow them to over-ride a veto, the number of rural, pro-gun democrats should prevent this, so veto requests will be critical. Governor Brown has been quoted as saying he “isn’t that bad on guns.” It will soon be time for all California gun owners to contact the Governor and remind him that it is time to make good on that statement. Together, gun rights advocates and grassroots California gun owners can defeat these attacks on law-abiding gun owners. We will defeat as many bills as possible in the legislature. We will call on the Governor to veto proposals that reach his desk. And we will take to the courts to overturn proposals that are passed. This is the battle they have wanted. This is the battle they must lose. Now is the time to remain focused and redouble our efforts. Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2013/09/countdown-to-gun-magazine-ammo-confiscation-in-california-4321/#ixzz2ea27Newa Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 17, 2013, 11:53:05 am http://www.infowars.com/feinstein-exploits-navy-yard-shooting-to-renew-call-to-disarm-mr-and-mrs-america
9/16/13 Feinstein Exploits Navy Yard Shooting to Renew Call to Disarm Mr. and Mrs. America Zeroes in on unconfirmed report shooter had an AR-15 California Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein has exploited another mass shooting to call for destroying the Second Amendment and disarming law-abiding Americans. “When will enough be enough?” Feinstein said in a statement Monday evening following the Navy Yard shooting in Washington, D.C. “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country,” she said. “We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” “I mourn those killed today at the Navy Yard in Washington and send my thoughts and prayers to those families grieving the loss of loved ones,.” She exploited unconfirmed reporters that the alleged shooter used a popular semi-automatic rifle Democrats and their gun-grabbing comrades have consistently demonized as an assault weapon. “There are reports the killer was armed with an AR-15, a shotgun and a semiautomatic pistol when he stormed an American military installation in the nation’s capital and took at least 12 innocent lives,” Feinstein said. “This is one more event to add to the litany of massacres that occur when a deranged person or grievance killer is able to obtain multiple weapons — including a military-style assault rifle — and kill many people in a short amount of time.” She once again called on Congress to disarm the American people and dismember the Bill of Rights following a monumental failure earlier this year to push anti-gun legislation through the Senate. In 1995, Feinstein lamented the failure of an earlier effort to take out the Second Amendment. “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them,” she told 60 Minutes. “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 17, 2013, 12:56:39 pm 9/16/13
California poised to become first state to impose full ban on lead bullets California is on the verge of becoming the first state to impose a full ban on hunting with lead bullets -- with environmentalists and gun-rights advocates squaring off as Gov. Jerry Brown decides whether to sign the legislation. The state already has a ban on lead-bullet hunting in eight counties with an endangered condor population. But the new proposal, overwhelmingly approved this month by the Democrat-controlled General Assembly, would impose a statewide ban on all hunting. Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown has until Oct. 12 to decide whether to sign the legislation, which would not be fully implemented for at least several years. Environmentalists and other supporters have broadened their argument beyond protecting the prehistoric condor bird, saying the lead bullets, and the left-behind lead fragments on which animals feed, are making their way into the country’s edible meat supply. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/16/california-poised-to-be-first-state-to-impose-statewide-ban-on-lead-bullets/?intcmp=latestnews#ixzz2f2YjnSHm Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 17, 2013, 04:58:37 pm I know both political parties are opposition-controlled, but nonetheless, this has been a pattern concerning the gun rights vs gun control debate...
When a "Republican" is in the White House, not only you RARELY, IF NEVER see these false flag shootings like Columbine, but these Presidents have quietly implemented strict gun control measures without a chirp from anyone, including the NRA types. For example, you didn't hear any outrage when DHS/FEMA went around New Orleans after Katrina to confiscate guns door to door. Neither Reagan when he called for universal background checks in the 1980's. But when a "Democrat" is in office? This is pretty much when you DO see these false flag shootings(ie-Clinton and Columbine, and Obama and Newtown/Navy Yard), but it's not until AFTER these events when you see these NRA/gun rights "activists" come out of the woodwork(along with these gun control "advocates" to boot). http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/17/20545458-gun-legislation-remains-stalled-after-washington-shootings?lite= 9/17/13 Gun legislation remains stalled after Washington shootings A day after a mass shooting left 13 dead within two miles of the Capitol, federal gun legislation is in the same place as it’s been for months: stalled in Congress. Still stung by an April defeat in the Senate, discouraged proponents of gun control legislation say that the chances for change are still dim, even as new calls for reform echo in the wake of the Navy Yard massacre. Aides and advocates say that little has changed from a political perspective to give supporters of gun control the five votes they would need to push through an amendment like the one crafted by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., that fell six votes short of passage in April. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., reflects on Monday's Navy Yard shooting and the Manchin-Toomey gun control amendment that failed in the Senate. "I'm listening to see if any of my colleagues are willing to change their vote on Manchin-Toomey,” said Sen. Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate and a longtime proponent of gun control. “I've not heard anything yet.” "I haven't, no," Manchin said when asked if he’d seen any indications that momentum had shifted in favor of his proposal in the wake of the Navy Yard killings. The Manchin-Toomey proposal, developed in the wake of the Newtown school shootings, would have mandated criminal background checks on most private sales and incorporated mental health records into the background check system. But it was defeated under heavy pressure from gun groups who said the law would restrict Second Amendment rights and invade gun owners’ privacy. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said flatly, "We don't have the votes" to try again for expanded background checks. The recall last week of two Colorado state senators who had promoted stronger gun regulations has done little to bolster gun control groups’ case that those who back new laws – even those deemed popular by pollsters – won’t face a political backlash at home, said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer. "I think it will bring up debate,” Hoyer told reporters of the Navy Yard shooting. “Whether it will bring up action is problematic. If the past is prologue, then that prologue is not very helpful." And time is not on legislators’ side either. With limited days left in the congressional calendar – and substantial time already used up by the debate over U.S. involvement in Syria – the issues of funding the government and raising the debt ceiling are likely to crowd out any new legislative pushes. Despite the slim chance for change, within hours of the rampage that left 13 people dead, advocates of gun control insisted the Navy Yard killings should reignite the debate over how to keep firearms out of the hands of those who could kill innocent people. “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat who has led efforts to ban military-style assault weapons, in a statement Monday evening. On the Senate floor on Tuesday, Durbin suggested that the bipartisan deal that failed in April could have helped prevent the Navy Yard shooter – who reportedly had a history of mental health problems as well as two gun-related citations – from obtaining the firearm he used at the Southeast Washington, D.C., complex. “God forbid we go on with business as usual today and not understand what happened yesterday,” he said. “What happened yesterday brings into question some important values in America. If we value our right for ourselves and our families and our children to be safe, if we value this Constitution, if we value the right of every American to enjoy their liberties with reasonable limitations, then we need to return to issues that are of importance.” Durbin also said that he would reschedule a hearing on “Stand your Ground” self-defense laws, which was slated for Tuesday but canceled in the wake of the Navy Yard shootings. Some advocates, including a group associated with the Newtown school shooting as well as Sybrina Fulton – the mother of Trayvon Martin, had scheduled a lobbying push on Capitol Hill around that hearing. Survivors of gun violence and their families will hold a rally Thursday on Capitol Hill to call for action on the background-check legislation. A spokesman for another group, the Sandy Hook Promise, which represents the families of many of the Newtown victims, said that the organization intends to remain “very involved” in the debate over gun violence. And Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who represents Newtown, said that public opinion towards Congress will continue to sour if lawmakers do nothing to address gun violence. “People are furious with this place and they're going to be even angrier if after yesterday we continue to do nothing,” he said. The Obama administration has issued a total of 25 executive orders in the effort to curb gun violence, including measures to bolster insurance coverage for mental health and public awareness of mental illness. But those changes would not go as far as the Manchin-Toomey bill in restricting those with a history of mental health issues from obtaining a firearm. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 18, 2013, 01:42:35 pm "Pastor" Rick Warren's interview with Piers Morgan last night - so Warren blames guns for his son's suicide, even though CA's gun laws are the strictest in the nation? And NOT the SSRI drugs his son was taking? This is one of those "be ye angry and sin not..." moments for me. >:(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrlOYnKF8LE Title: High School Textbook Rewrites Second Amendment–Literally Post by: Mark on September 19, 2013, 07:04:05 pm High School Textbook Rewrites Second Amendment–Literally
The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains a summary of each Amendment that alters the initial intent in which they were created. The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, "The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia." (http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/04160E9CCD6B405ABE832FB368757512.jpg) The actual Second 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." Guyer High School and numerous others have assigned the book for an "Advanced Placement History" course. By assigning anti-factual literature, the only advanced placement the school has ensured for their students is in the world of biased academia. Sadly, parents now have to fact check textbooks to be sure their students are being taught accurate history. High schools and universities should focus on being a marketplace of ideas, not force-feeding leftist theories. In an effort to remove the textbook from the school's curriculum, the Daily Paul has created a "Call to Action" plan. They are asking parents and concerned members of the community to attend the next school board meeting and demand answers. Liberal indoctrination has become a serious threat to academic freedom and we must fight to stop it. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/18/School-Textbook-Changes-Constitution Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 19, 2013, 09:24:14 pm Kind of reminds you how the NIV and other false perversions have twisted a lot of KJV scriptures.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 20, 2013, 01:00:26 pm Journalism professor says he hopes for murder of NRA members' children
A journalism professor at the University of Kansas (KU) turned to Twitter on Monday to suggest he would like to see the murder of children of National Rifle Association (NRA) members at the hands of a deranged gunman. “#NavyYardShooting The blood is on the hands of the #NRA,” tweeted David Guth, who is an associate professor of Journalism at the university’s William Allen White School of Journalism. “Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters, he continued. “Shame on you. May God damn you.” Speaking with Campus Reform on Wednesday, Guth confirmed it was he who sent the controversial tweet. “Hell no, hell no, I do not regret that Tweet,” he said. “I don't take it back one bit.” Guth also doubled down on the statement when other Twitter users pressed him, suggesting it was was shameful to call for the death of children. “God’s justice takes many forms,” he tweeted in response. And on Monday the associate journalism professor echoed those sentiments on his personal blog, called Snapping Turtle. “I don't wish what happened today on anyone,” he wrote. “But if it does happen again — and it likely will — may it happen to those misguided miscreants who suggest that today's death toll at the Navy Yard would have been lower if the employees there were allowed to pack heat.” Also in his interview with Campus Reform, he said that he wished “a pox on our Congress and a pox on the NRA” for not instituting gun control policies to prevent mass shootings. “It absolutely appalls me that after Newtown, we could not have come to some kind of sane agreement on something as simple as the number of bullets in a magazine or the availability of assault weapons,” he said. (http://www.campusreform.org/img/CROBlog/5086/tweet2.jpg) Despite early rumors, the weapon used in the Navy Yard shooting was not an assault weapon, but a shotgun typically used for hunting small birds and wild game. KU on Wednesday told Campus Reform that they stand by the professor's right to make such statements. “Faculty have their own social media accounts and use those to express personal opinions, but those opinions do not represent the university,” spokesman Jack Martin wrote in an email statement to Campus Reform on Wednesday. While Guth’s Twitter account is personal, his biography includes a link that directs to the school’s website. “An Eastern Shoreman turned professor and historian,” reads his description. “A devoted husband, father and dog owner. Most important: an independent thinker.” Official school policy demands all in the community adhere to a standard of “inclusive learning and working environment at the University of Kansas.” Guth made his comments the same day as the massacre at the Navy Yard in Washington, DC which left 13 people dead including the shooter. Guth also served as the associate dean of the journalism school from July 2004 to July 2009. The NRA did not make a spokesperson available to Campus Reform at the time of publication. http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=5086 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 20, 2013, 01:06:53 pm Although my Sociology professor in college(1996) was a tad bit wacky(ie-he would warn about "racism" in America, although nothing too serious), I don't recall any of my professors engage in THIS kind of talk back then, NEVER.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 21, 2013, 10:44:26 pm Infowars article - but a pretty good one here...
http://www.infowars.com/rick-warren-forgives-gun-seller-for-sons-suicide/ 9/18/13 Rick Warren ‘Forgives’ Gun Seller For Son’s Suicide “Someone on the internet sold Matthew an unregistered gun. I pray he seeks God’s forgiveness. I forgive him.” David Knight Infowars.com September 18, 2013 Rick Warren, pastor of one of the largest churches in America and one of the most popular evangelical authors in the US with over 36 million copies sold of his “Purpose Driven Life,” gave his first interview since his son’s suicide to Piers Morgan. Why Warren would choose to make his appearance on a talk show with a relatively low audience became clear as he focused his grief on Piers’ pet issue — gun control. Searching for answers in his son’s suicide, Rick Warren and his wife seem to have focused on the gun and the gun seller as the reason. Typically, Piers Morgan ignored FBI statistics showing violent crime falling as legal barriers to the public owning guns decrease. Instead, Morgan offered some figures distorted out of context and asked Warren, “Now that you’ve been so personally touched, and you’re in such a position of authority, is it affecting what you’re going to be saying going forward?” Rick Warren replied, “Well yeah, it’s going to affect me in all three of those areas- not just in simply gun control. By the way, when I heard about those deaths at the Naval Yard- the first thing I did was get down on my knees and pray for those families of the victims, those who died and those who were wounded. My heart went out to them.” The fact that the Naval Yard shooting took place in a military facility within Washington, DC, the city with arguably the most stringent gun laws in the country never occurred to either Piers or the Warrens. In fact, the District of Columbia was taken to the Supreme Court by a cop, Heller, who wanted to keep a handgun at home but was denied that Constitutional right by DC’s draconian laws. He won at the Supreme Court in DC v Heller in 2008, but the District of Columbia has chosen to ignore the Supreme Court for 5 years, just as they ignore the Constitution. Those statistics, and the disarming of even law enforcement officers, are the context for the Naval Yard shooting that Piers and Warren hope you don’t see. Soon after his son’s suicide, with a gun that his son obtained in violation of California’s gun laws, Warren tweeted: “Someone on the internet sold Matthew an unregistered gun. I pray he seeks God’s forgiveness. I forgive him.” Selling a gun is not assisted suicide. The seller of the gun doesn’t need forgiveness. He did nothing wrong. Would Warren have to forgive a hardware store owner for selling his son a rope if his son later hung himself with it? Would Warren have to forgive the person that sold his son a car if his son committed suicide with it? Would Warren demand that we all have our cars taken away if his son died in a car? Would he stop at just harassing potential car buyers? The sale that Warren views as a sin against him, while illegal in California, was not unlawful according to the higher law of the Constitution. The Constitution affirms a God-given right of defense and specifically recognizes firearms. It is legislators that should be begging for forgiveness for unlawful laws like those in California and DC that turn the population into unarmed victims. As the Warrens related the sequence of events leading up to their son’s death, they revealed that they knew he had purchased a gun for the sole purpose of committing suicide. Piers was somewhat taken back by this and asked why they didn’t call the police. At this point Kay Warren said he would have killed himself if she did and Rick Warren defended their actions by saying , “I don’t think it would have made any difference. If you are determined, you’re going to figure out a way to take your life.” Exactly. Prohibition doesn’t work. Whether it is the failure of Alcohol Prohibition to keep people from getting booze, the failure of the War on Drugs to keep people from getting drugs, or the failure of DC’s and California’s gun laws to keep people from getting guns — they all fail for the same reason. By placing our trust in government to protect people with prohibitions, we fail to effectively address the underlying spiritual problems. A pastor, of all people, should have the wisdom to see that. But too many spiritual leaders look to government to solve problems that government can’t solve, using tools that increase violence on the streets and corruption in the government. Many Christian leaders still have not learned the lessons of Prohibition and are starting yet another misguided crusade like the War on Drugs. Warren’s wife, Kay, continued, “Matthew’s body was broken. That gun broke his body, and he was buried in brokenness. But he’s going to be raised in glory.” Blaming inanimate objects for the horrors of this fallen world is at best unhelpful, at worst, a form of animism. Guns are a tool. They can be used to save lives or they can be used for murder. The difference is the man. More specifically, the difference is the soul. A pastor should understand this. My grandfather’s life was saved by a gun. In the early 20th century, he and his brother-in-law worked a route where they collected rent on a weekly basis. They kept a regular routine at a regular time. A thief ambushed his brother-in-law, striking him in the back of the head with a hatchet and stuffing his dead body in the trunk of his car. The police were unable to find the victim or his car — if they were actually looking. My grandfather found him. After the man was caught, another thief thought he would try the same thing. My grandfather saw him lying on the floor behind the driver’s seat, pulled his pistol and told him he would shoot without warning the next time. There was no next time. No shot was fired. The gun reflects the character of the man. Today my grandfather would probably be in jail for ignoring some obscure gun regulation. He never respected unlawful meddling by the government. Rick Warren obviously doesn’t understand how the policies that he and Piers advocate endanger people and take the lives of disarmed victims like those killed in the Naval Yard shooting. Rick Warren doesn’t understand history either, nor the political importance of guns as a deterrent to the crime that took more lives than any other in the 20th century — democide. As long as Rick Warren lacks knowledge and wisdom on these things, he should leave it with this comment from last night: “God isn’t to blame for my son’s death. My son took his life. It was his choice.” — and then remain silent. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 21, 2013, 10:47:45 pm Quote Warren’s wife, Kay, continued, “Matthew’s body was broken. That gun broke his body, and he was buried in brokenness. But he’s going to be raised in glory.” Blaming inanimate objects for the horrors of this fallen world is at best unhelpful, at worst, a form of animism. Guns are a tool. They can be used to save lives or they can be used for murder. The difference is the man. More specifically, the difference is the soul. A pastor should understand this. The gun caused his body to have a corrupted flesh? Uhm...that's not what scripture says... 1Cor 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. 1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 1Co 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 23, 2013, 12:03:01 pm http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/09/17/carney-obama-implementing-executive-actions-following-navy-yard-shooting/
9/17/13 Carney: Obama Implementing Executive Actions Following Navy Yard Shooting WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — President Barack Obama on Monday wearily lamented “yet another mass shooting,” this time in the nation’s capital where the debate that raged earlier this year over tightening firearms laws has stalled amid opposition from gun-rights advocates. The shooting at the Washington Navy Yard came a week after voters recalled two Colorado legislators who supported tougher gun measures, illustrating the strong political headwinds faced by lawmakers seeking to respond to the violence. Obama, for one, has been powerless to get legislation passed despite a string of mass shootings during his presidency. In the wake of the shooting at the Navy Yard, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president is implementing executive actions and reiterated his commitment to strengthening gun laws, including expanding background checks to sales online and at gun shows. **Didn't Rick Warren say how his son(who committed suicide) *illegally* bought a gun off the internet? Coincidence? “The president supports, as do an overwhelming majority of Americans, common-sense measures to reduce gun violence,” Carney said. Even as it was unfolding, the Washington shooting was reigniting talk about guns. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a leading advocate of gun control legislation, mourned “the litany of massacres” the country has suffered in the form of mass shootings. “When will enough be enough?” Feinstein asked. “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” But it was far from certain whether the shooting would actually influence the larger debate over gun control vs. gun rights, given that the already difficult politics of the issue have gotten only tougher since December’s shooting at Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School. That shooting, which killed 20 first-graders and six staffers, spurred Obama to propose stricter firearms laws to prevent future deaths. Gun owners, aided by their advocates at the National Rifle Association, have successfully fought Obama’s legislation, even though polls show broad support for tougher gun laws. Obama and gun control advocates have vowed to continue fighting since the Senate rejected expanded background checks in April, but they can’t point to a single new Senate supporter. Their case wasn’t helped by last week’s NRA-backed recall of two Colorado Democratic senators who supported expanded background checks and limits on ammunition magazines. Matt Bennett, senior vice president at Democratic-leaning Third Way, says the Colorado senators’ mistake was banning high-capacity magazines — even though Third Way has supported such a ban. “We do as good public policy, but we don’t support Congress trying to do it at this point because it’s bad politics,” Bennett said. “Voters don’t like it.” New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an advocate for stricter gun laws with his group Mayor’s Against Illegal Guns, contributed around $350,000 to support the Colorado Democrats — Senate President John Morse and Sen. Angela Giron. The NRA spent roughly the same amount opposing them. Mark Glaze, executive director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said the group will continue to “give legislators who take risks to protect public safety the resources to defend themselves.” He said it may take some time, but predicted eventually they will have support in the Senate for tighter laws. “It’s a question of how long some senators think they can politically sustain doing nothing while 33 more Americans die every day and the mass shootings continue,” Glaze said. Obama didn’t mention gun control as he addressed the Navy Yard shooting from the White House, promising to pursue “whoever carried out this cowardly act.” “We are confronting yet another mass shooting, and today it happened on a military installation in our nation’s capital,” Obama said. “It’s a shooting that targeted our military and civilian personnel. These are men and women who were going to work, doing their job protecting all of us. They’re patriots, and they know the dangers of serving abroad, but today they faced the unimaginable violence that they wouldn’t have expected here at home.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on September 23, 2013, 02:42:21 pm Quote the Colorado senators’ mistake was banning high-capacity magazines I agree, that's a mistake. It serves ZERO purpose in reducing "gun violence". What is needed is facts of actual scenarios where a gun was used to shoot somebody. Facts like what type gun was used, what was the clip size, if any, etc. Where are those facts? They SHOULD be in each police report of each shooting investigation. It takes about 2-3 seconds to change clips in pretty much any handgun or rifle. It actually takes longer to duck your head behind cover, then pop your head back up to aim than it does to reload. Banning clip size is just petty anti-gun annoyance to the industry. The real problem that these people refuse to talk about is with the people who shoot other people. It's not about what they use on people, it's the shooter themselves that are the issue. Man has done violent things to their fellow man since Cain. It won't change one bit till Jesus changes it in that day. So you ban guns, then what, knives? And after you find that banning knives doesn't reduce the violence, then what, ban shovels, ice picks, and hammers? Just another example how the world focuses on the outward appearance, and not the spiritual. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 25, 2013, 10:53:42 pm I'm not trying to imply that there was some conspiracy foul play or anything, but what is it with all of this "self-inflicted gun shot wound" reporting?(ie-when Rick Warren's son committed suicide, supposedly, the same was said)
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/paul-oliver-suicide-san-diego-chargers-georgia-bulldogs-092513 Ex-NFL player Oliver commits suicide 9/25/13 A medical examiner near Atlanta says former San Diego Chargers safety Paul Oliver has committed suicide. Cobb County investigators say the 29-year-old Oliver was found dead Tuesday night at his home in Marietta, about 20 miles northwest of downtown Atlanta. Police say Oliver died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. In a statement, Chargers officials said Oliver was a 2007 fourth-round supplemental draft pick from the University of Georgia. Oliver was academically ineligible his senior year and was unable to return to UGA's squad. “Everyone in the Chargers family is sad today after hearing the news about Paul," the team said. "He was part of our family for five years. At just 29 years old, he still had a lifetime in front of him. Right now all of our thoughts and prayers are with his family during this most difficult time.” Oliver played for the Chargers from 2007 to 2011. Club officials say Oliver's best season was 2010, when he started eight times and recorded 62 tackles. Oliver was released by the New Orleans Saints after training camp in 2011, and returned to San Diego that season. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on September 26, 2013, 04:45:01 am Well, I don't mean to be sarcastic, but when a person shoots themselves, it's called "self-inflicted", to mean somebody else didn't do it. I don't see any conspiracy.
Title: Nearly two mass shootings per month since 2009, study finds Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 27, 2013, 10:03:03 pm http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/27/20724082-nearly-two-mass-shootings-per-month-since-2009-study-finds?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=4
9/27/13 Nearly two mass shootings per month since 2009, study finds There have been almost two mass shootings per month in the U.S. for five consecutive years -- yet such cases account for only a tiny fraction of firearm killings, according to a report by a coalition of mayors eager to stave off gun violence in the country. Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a seven-year-old bipartisan coalition comprising more than 1,000 U.S. mayors, said in a report released Friday that between January 2009 and September 2013 there have been 93 mass shootings in 35 states. The 35-page report, which relied on FBI data and media reports, defines a mass shooting as an event in which "at least four people were murdered with a gun." The report said that according to FBI statistics, in 2010 mass shootings accounted for less than 1 percent of firearm murders. Assault weapons were used in 14 of the 93 shootings, according to the report, and when such weapons were used, there was an average of 63 percent more deaths. In 10 cases, there was evidence that the mental illness of the shooter had been documented before the shooting. Additionally, in 53 of the cases, the shooter targeted and killed a spouse or loved one. In 40 of the incidents, the shooter committed suicide. The report provided detailed descriptions of the mass shootings, from what kind of guns were used to "prohibited criteria" - a section stating whether or not the shooter was prohibited from owning a firearm. The most recent case listed is the Sept. 16 shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, in which a computer contractor suspected of suffering from mental illness killed 12 people before being shot by police. Members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns include Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 28, 2013, 06:58:43 am I wonder WHY we are not seeing this plastered all over the new media? Why arent all those demonic Liberals out there screaming their heads off?
Still i think the teachers should be armed also, instead of militarizing the schools. Or at least have the cops in plain clothes or something. Obama administration to allocate $45M for cops in schools The Obama administration plans to spend millions of dollars to place armed police officers in schools throughout the country in a move advocated by the National Rifle Association in the wake of last December's shooting massacre in Newtown, Conn. The Department of Justice announced Friday it's giving nearly $45 million to fund 356 new school resource officer positions. Funding will be provided by grants from the department's Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS, office. "Just over nine months after the senseless mass shooting at Sandy Hook, we remain committed to providing every resource we can to ensure that the children of Newtown can feel safe and secure at school and elsewhere," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. "And as we hold lost loved ones in our thoughts and prayers, we resolve to continue to support and protect this community — and to help them heal together." Holder announced the department has allocated $150,000 to put police officers in schools in Newtown. The grant from the department's Bureau of Justice Assistance is intended to fund two positions, such as resource officers. The NRA was initially criticized by Democrats for focusing so closely on school security, and rejecting gun control measures, following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.in which 26 people were killed. NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre in December called for armed officers to be installed in every school in the country. In the NRA's first in-depth public comments since the shooting, LaPierre argued that if banks and members of Congress can have protection, schools across America should be afforded the same security. "It's now time for us to assume responsibly for our schools," he said. "The only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be permanently involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection." He added: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." In August, the Department of Justice authorized spending another $2.5 million in Newtown to help compensate police for overtime, forensic work and security since the shooting. The gunman, who had killed his mother at home before going to the school, killed himself as police closed in. Police have been present since January at the school Sandy Hook students are using. The town's high school and one of its middle schools also have resource officers. The district's acting school superintendent, John Reed, declined to comment Friday on the Department of Justice announcement through an assistant, who said the schools had not been notified about the funds. Newtown established a school security committee last year and has been working with New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice on a security analysis of all its schools. Reed sent a letter to parents last month informing them of several security improvements, including the installation of security cameras in all schools. The committee has said its goal is to have the full-time presence of one police officer and at least one trained security officer at each school building during regular school hours and it expects that to occur shortly after winter break. Also on Friday, the State Bond Commission approved a $3.7 million grant for Newtown to finance the planning, design and site preparation costs for a new Sandy Hook Elementary School. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/28/obama-administration-to-spend-45m-on-cops-in-schools/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 28, 2013, 12:49:19 pm I wonder WHY we are not seeing this plastered all over the new media? Why arent all those demonic Liberals out there screaming their heads off? Still i think the teachers should be armed also, instead of militarizing the schools. Or at least have the cops in plain clothes or something. Obama administration to allocate $45M for cops in schools The Obama administration plans to spend millions of dollars to place armed police officers in schools throughout the country in a move advocated by the National Rifle Association in the wake of last December's shooting massacre in Newtown, Conn. The Department of Justice announced Friday it's giving nearly $45 million to fund 356 new school resource officer positions. Funding will be provided by grants from the department's Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS, office. So that's IT? Only $45m for 356 new school resource officer positions? That's NOT much! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 28, 2013, 12:59:29 pm So that's IT? Only $45m for 356 new school resource officer positions? That's NOT much! well the point is, is that Obama just put guns in schools for protection. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on September 29, 2013, 04:34:43 am 356 new officers, in schools? Uh, that doesn't cover all schools. Not even close. It's political window dressing.
There are over 20,000 secondary high schools in the US. That is just high schools! Who is he kidding? There are over 16 million students in middle and high school. Obama and his ilk are such sorry excuses for humans! http://www.betterhighschools.org/pubs/documents/HSInTheUS_1210.pdf (http://www.betterhighschools.org/pubs/documents/HSInTheUS_1210.pdf) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 29, 2013, 05:09:38 am its propbably just for schools in Chicago. ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on September 29, 2013, 05:25:10 am America’s Largest Gun Shop Abruptly Dropped by Credit Card Co. — and the Reason Will Have You Shaking Your Head in Disbelief
The Hyatt Gun Shop of Charlotte, N.C., has been doing business for the last four years with a subsidiary of Visa — a key Obama campaign donor — that specializes in credit card transactions. But the subsidiary, Authorize.net/CyberSource, reportedly has ended its relationship with the nation’s largest gun store for a reason that might get you scratching your head. Because the Hyatt Gun Shop sells, well, guns. The Authorize.net email said that gun sales violated a section of the service agreement it signed with the gun shop, reportedly after Hyatt detailed its sales and products — and, you know, its name – according to the Washington Examiner. “We’ve never seen anything like this,” said Justin Anderson, Hyatt’s marketing director, who added it took a week and thousands of dollars to line up a “gun friendly” credit card processor for online sales. More from the Examiner: The brushoff of Hyatt’s business has sparked a national boycott effort against Authorize.net and parent company CyberSource organized by the website Grass Roots North Carolina. “It looks like the small but noisy anti-gun crowd has gotten to what must be a jelly-spined PR department at CyberSource and Authorize.Net. Either that, or leadership at these companies have simply become anti-gun all on their own,” said the website in announcing the boycott. Anderson suspects that the company, purchased by Visa in 2010, got cold feet dealing with a leading gun seller and he said that he’s heard of other gun stores being dropped. The company had no immediate comment. The sudden move comes two weeks after the Washington Navy Yard shootings which were followed by President Obama’s plea for more gun control. Several Visa executives contributed to the president’s re-election campaign, the Examiner notes, adding that their total was $21,780, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Here’s the email notice from Authorize.net: Dear Hyatt Gun Shop Inc, Authorize.Net LLC (“Authorize.Net”) has determined that the nature of your business constitutes a violation of Section 2.xiv of the Authorize.Net Acceptable Use Guidelines and Sections 3.3 and 11.3 of the Authorize.Net Service Agreement (the “Agreement”). These sections include, but are not limited to, the sale of firearms or any similar product. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 4 of the Acceptable Use Guidelines, your ability to access and use the Authorize.Net Services will be terminated on September 30, 2013. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/28/americas-largest-gun-shop-abruptly-dropped-by-credit-card-co-and-the-reason-will-have-you-shaking-your-head-in-disbelief/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on September 29, 2013, 05:49:20 am Quote But the subsidiary, Authorize.net/CyberSource, reportedly has ended its relationship with the nation’s largest gun store This is what I feel is the beginnings that will lead up to the forcing of the "mark". Everything seems peaceful, business is doing fine, everybody is making money. Then boom! People change and so do their policies. You have no real say over a company saying we no longer want to do business with you, but that is exactly what the "mark of the beast" is all about, a forcing of terms on the users under the threat of being cast out of their system of carnal things, which is at least a form of being put to death, because outside the worldly system, a carnal life gets real difficult. I have personally seen what it's like to be on the streets and without an identity card and no physical address as a residence. That freaks out people in general. It confuses many people that you don't have an address (or phone number) because their social system is based on a name, address, age, etc in their records. If you have no id, that really makes for problems. Eventually, it gets worse for those who are outside Caesar's worldly system. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on October 02, 2013, 07:02:12 am Why Are They Trying So Hard To Demonize Gun Owners?
There is an all-out effort to demonize gun owners in the United States today. Those that own guns are repeatedly portrayed as being uneducated, mentally deficient racists in the mainstream media. No evidence is ever produced to actually back up those claims. Gun owners regularly make lists of “potential terrorists” in official government documents, and many government officials openly regard them as ultra-paranoid “conspiracy nuts” that are a serious threat to national security. Of course the truth is that gun owners are actually among the most law-abiding and patriotic people in the entire nation, but that doesn’t really fit with the radical gun control agenda of the progressive elite. In order to move their agenda forward, they must make gun owners look bad, and they will go to ridiculous extremes in order to achieve that goal. And to a certain extent, it is working. As you will see below, some large financial companies no longer want to conduct business with gun owners, and just the sight of a gun is enough to get people freaking out and calling the police in many communities in America today. Never underestimate the power of propaganda. Just think about it – pretty much the only time that advocates for gun owner organizations are invited to appear on the mainstream media is when the big news organizations think that they can make them look bad. Other than a few token appearances by pro-gun advocates, most of the time it is a relentless flood of anti-gun messages on the mainstream news. And often the anti-gun messages that Americans are being fed are absolutely absurd. In fact, they would be absolutely hilarious if so many people were not taking them so seriously. For example, Michael Moore actually believes that the reason why so many “white people” want to own guns is because they are “afraid of black people”… “It’s because too many white people are afraid of black people. Period. The vast majority of the guns in the U.S. are sold to white people who live in the suburbs or the country. When we fantasize about being mugged or home invaded, what’s the image of the perpetrator in our heads? Is it the freckled-face kid from down the street – or is it someone who is, if not black, at least poor?” And Chris Matthews is apparently convinced that most gun owners are virulent racists that hate Barack Obama just because he has dark skin… I have to tell you this. I see a far bigger fight than over background checks and gun shows. It’s culture war. They don’t accept an African-American president or president of color who has some antecedence in Africa. No. It has to be us or him. And our guns or him. And everything is totemic; everything is iconic; everything’s fighting words. It is easy to laugh at such bizarre comments, but millions of people actually take these jokers seriously, and they are having an impact. Just recently, the owner of one of the largest gun stores in America, Hyatt Gun Shop, was informed by his credit card processor (Authorize.net) that he had violated their service agreement and they no longer wanted his business. So what did Hyatt Gun Shop do wrong? Well, they sold guns. Yes, I know that this sounds crazy, but this is actually happening. The following is the text of the actual email that Larry Hyatt received… Dear Hyatt Gun Shop Inc, Authorize.Net LLC (“Authorize.Net”) has determined that the nature of your business constitutes a violation of Section 2.xiv of the Authorize.Net Acceptable Use Guidelines and Sections 3.3 and 11.3 of the Authorize.Net Service Agreement (the “Agreement”). These sections include, but are not limited to, the sale of firearms or any similar product. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 4 of the Acceptable Use Guidelines, your ability to access and use the Authorize.Net Services will be terminated on September 30, 2013. And in case you are tempted to think that this is not a big deal, it should also be noted that Authorize.net is a fully-owned subsidiary of Visa USA. Are big financial companies such as Visa going to start simply refusing to do business with anyone that sells guns? If you believe that this could never happen, just check out what the owner of American Spirit Arms said about his dealings with Bank of America on Facebook… My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms and I wanted to share my recent experience with Bank of America (which we have been doing business with for over 10 years)…. Everyone is familiar with the latest increase in guns sales, dealers selling out of inventory, Manufacturers back logged for months, large revenue all generated in the last two weeks …. American Spirit Arms is no exception to the overwhelming demand. What we have experienced is that our web site orders have jumped 500% causing our web site E commerce processing larger Deposits to BANK OF AMERICA ..Well, this through up a huge RED Flag with Bank of America . So they decided to hold the deposits for further review, meaning that the orders/payments that were coming in through the web, (being paid by the customer and that were shipped out by American Spirit Arms), the BANK was keeping (UNDER REVIEW )..as you could imagine this made me furious…After countless hours on the phone with BANK OF AMERICA I finally got a Manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for FURTHER REVIEW …HER EXACT WORDS WERE ….. “WE BELIEVE YOU SHOULD NOT BE SELLING GUNS and PARTS ON THE INTERNET” But of course it is not just financial companies that are demonizing gun owners. Some more examples of this phenomenon were cited in a commentary authored by Dr. Michael S. Brown… In San Clemente, California, a school groundskeeper who had won a large sexual harassment settlement from the local school district was the target of a dramatic SWAT team raid on his residence. He was held on one million dollars bail for the heinous crime of possessing allegedly stolen rakes and buckets. Someone, perhaps seeking revenge, tipped off the police that the man had a large gun collection. News reports contained no mention of the man making threats or plotting violence; he simply owned guns. A school district administrator was quoted as saying, “I’m personally horrified that someone who has daily contact in the vicinity of children and teachers owned the arsenal he apparently had.” Other officials crowed that they had prevented another Columbine. It is unlikely that the man will receive justice in a culture that vilifies gun owning citizens in this manner. At a large university in Seattle, a white collar employee with an excellent work record was involved in a minor dispute over computer access. When he was called into the administrator’s office to discuss it, two campus police officers were present. “We know you have a concealed weapons permit. Are you armed?” He was not, but the damage to his reputation had already been done. Apparently, a coworker who was competing with the man for a position had tipped off the administration that he was a gun owner. We are rapidly getting to the point where being a gun owner in America will automatically make you an outcast. And progressive strategists don’t plan on letting up. In fact, it was recently revealed that they have drafted an 80 page “how-to manual” that actually encourages gun control advocates to emotionally exploit major shooting incidents to advance the cause of gun control… Democratic strategists have drafted a how-to manual on manipulating the public’s emotions toward gun control in the aftermath of a major shooting. “A high-profile gun-violence incident temporarily draws more people into the conversation about gun violence,” asserts the guide. “We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.” The 80-page document titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging,” also urges gun-control advocates use images of frightening-looking guns and shooting scenes to make their point. “The most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak,” the guide insists. “The debate over gun violence in America is periodically punctuated by high-profile gun violence incidents including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek. When an incident such as these attracts sustained media attention, it creates a unique climate for our communications efforts.” If you would like to read the entire manual, you can find it right here. And of course Barack Obama continues to issue more executive orders about guns almost every time a major shooting incident makes the news. But with conservatives in charge of the U.S. House of Representatives, he knows that there is a limit on what he will be able to do for now. So the Obama administration has been busy pushing the new international treaty on arms regulation that it hopes will advance the cause of gun control. Fortunately, many gun owner organizations are deeply concerned about this and they are sounding the alarm. The following is from a recent Fox News article about this new treaty… But the treaty also advocates keeping data of arms purchases, which the NRA and other groups say could be used as an international log to keep tabs on gun owners. The record-keeping section in the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) encourages members to “maintain records of conventional arms covered under Article 2,” which include battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, warships and small arms and light weapons. Further, those records should be kept for a minimum of 10 years, the treaty states — which NRA leader Wayne LaPierre has referred to as “nothing more than gun registration by a different name.” Because the treaty’s language is so broad, LaPierre has said that “manufacturers of civilian shotguns would have to comply with the same regulatory process as a manufacturer of military attack helicopters.” One thing is for sure – the attacks from the progressives on gun owners are not going to stop. It does not matter to them that a study that was recently published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy discovered that nations that have more guns tend to have less crime. It does not matter to them that approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year. Apparently what those women are supposed to do is be sexually assaulted first and then call the police for help. That sounds absolutely insane, but that is the world that the progressives want us to live in. Let us hope that they do not win. http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/why-are-they-trying-so-hard-to-demonize-gun-owners Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 02, 2013, 07:47:36 am Even leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention(Richard Land, Franklin Graham, and Rick Warren) are pushing for gun control.
When Churchianity gets involved, then you know it's the end of the line right there. Judgment must begin at the house of the Lord. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on October 27, 2013, 07:32:45 am Concealed Carrier Foils Mass Shooting in Arizona
Some of the best stories of heroism are completely ignored by major news outlets who refuse to report on stories like this where a gun owner saves the day. But thanks to an Arizona man who carried a concealed handgun many lives were saved last Sunday morning. Several people were at a party in Arizona when a 27-year-old man got into an argument with some of the party goers. Eventually the man was asked to leave. He was gone for a short time but soon returned with a rifle and started firing shots outside the house. The 27-year-old then started aiming his rifle at some of the guests at the party. That’s when the 39-year-old concealed handgun carrier drew his firearm and shot the gunman. The concealed carrier remained on the scene until the police arrived at about 1:30am and the suspect was taken to the hospital with life-threatening injuries. According to AZ central, Glendale Police Department spokeswoman Officer Tracey Breeden said that the concealed carrier was justified in shooting the gunman. “This is standard procedure under these type of circumstances,” Breeden said. “Information and evidence detectives have gathered leads them to believe the 27-year-old was not only firing his rifle, endangering partygoers, but also pointed the weapon at other partygoers, endangering them, prior to the 39-year-old displaying a weapon and shooting the 27-year-old.” The investigation is ongoing and charges are pending, Breeden said. In the state of Arizona a license is not required in order to carry a concealed handgun. Who knows how many lives were saved that night because a law abiding gun owner was responsible enough to carry a gun and smart enough to use it when lives were on the line. Share this story with anyone you can, because you will probably not hear about it on TV, and gun owners are only demonized by an anti-gun media. This easily could have been a mass shooting in Arizona, but it was all stopped because a good guy with a gun was there to stop the bad guy with the gun. - See more at: http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/concealed-carrier-foils-mass-shooting-in-arizona/#sthash.UwLi44QW.BTW59t2t.dpuf Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on October 28, 2013, 03:39:08 am You would think with the law here in Arizona not requiring permits for concealed or open carry, that people all over would be armed, but they aren't. Only a very small percentage of the population actually carry a gun here.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 01, 2013, 05:43:16 am San Francisco approves confiscatory ban on magazines holding 10-plus rounds
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an ordinance that places a confiscatory ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammo on Oct. 29. Those who are in possession of the high-capacity magazines or high-capacity ammunition feeding devices will have 90 days to turn them over to police, sell them out-of-state or render them permanently inoperable. Failure to do so will result in misdemeanor charges. “While not a panacea, this legislation provides law enforcement with more tools to continue to address gun violence and also continues to strengthen our city’s strong stance on gun regulation,” the bill’s sponsor, Supervisor Malia Cohen, told the San Francisco Chronicle. In 2000, the state legislature placed a ban on the sale, transport, import or purchase of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, but gun owners who purchased 10-plus round magazines before the enactment of the state ban were grandfathered in. For residents of San Francisco, that no longer holds true unless you qualify for the exemption, i.e. you’re a law enforcement officer, an armored car driver, a museum curator or a Hollywood movie/television producer (these magazines can be “used as props”), according to the law. Aside from putting a retroactive ban on 10-plus round magazines, the bill requires gun dealers to inform customers of local laws, establishes the presumption that an owner who has not reported a firearm lost or stolen remains in possession of the firearm, and prohibits minors from entering shooting ranges unless they are accompanied by a parent or guardian, the SF Chronicle reports. Cohen is a staunch pro-gun control proponent. She has penned other ordinances that limit gun rights for San Francisco citizens, including one that banned hollow-point bullets and requires the police to be notified if one purchases a large amount of ammunition. The board approved this measure earlier this year. With tougher gun laws in place, she hopes to now focus on ways to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, which she acknowledged is the root cause of mass shootings like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. “Banning assault rifles only scratches the surface,” she said. “We need to … be better at addressing mental health concerns if we really want to solve the problem.” The confiscatory magazine ban was co-sponsored by Supervisors David Chiu, David Campos, Norman Yee and Eric Mar. Given the overwhelming support for the measure, San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee is expected to sign it into law. In response to this latest push for gun control, the National Rifle Association wrote an open letter arguing against the effort. “Banning ammunition magazines holding 10 or more rounds … plainly conflicts with the Second Amendment,” the NRA stated in a press release. “The U.S. Supreme Court recently made clear, firearms and accessories ‘typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes’ or those ‘in common use’ are protected by the Constitution and cannot be flatly banned,” the gun lobby argues and added that it’s California legal team is prepared to file a lawsuit to prevent the new law from taking effect and have it declared unconstitutional. The movement to strengthen gun control laws at the municipal level has taken hold in California because many gun control advocates are dissatisfied with Gov. Jerry Brown, who vetoed seven stringent gun measures earlier this month, while signing 11 into law. Given that the state has no preemption laws with respect to firearms, cities are free to pass whatever gun laws they’d like to and gun control advocates are taking advantage of this. Not only in San Francisco, but in Sunnyvale, where a similar gun control measure is on the Nov. 5 ballot. http://www.guns.com/2013/10/30/san-francisco-approves-confiscatory-ban-magazines-holding-10-plus-rounds/ Title: Guns & Ammo shocks readers with editorial calling for gun control Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 06, 2013, 07:51:22 pm Guns & Ammo shocks readers with editorial calling for gun control
http://news.yahoo.com/guns-ammo-editorial-controversy-203042117.html 11/6/13 Guns & Ammo, "the world's most widely read firearms magazine," is under fire from angry readers over a shocking editorial published in the December issue supporting gun control. "Way too many gun owners still seem to believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement," contributing editor Dick Metcalf wrote in a column titled "Let's Talk Limits." "The fact is, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be." Because of the Second Amendment, Metcalf argues, "all U.S. citizens have a right to keep and bear arms, but I do not believe that they have a right to use them irresponsibly." Not surprisingly, many readers are flocking to the Guns & Ammo Facebook page, threatening to cancel their subscriptions and boycott the magazine's advertisers until Metcalf is fired. "If Dick Metcalf isn't given the boot, I will give the boot to my subscription," one reader wrote. "Stabbed in the back by one of our own. What a shame." **Yes, enemies come from WITHIN, NOT from without like these Obama-types! "I've cancelled my subscription and I'm NEVER coming back, and I have been a reader since 1964 and a subscriber since 1970," wrote another. "It is unconscionable for a GUN magazine to publish this kind of dribble." "I will NEVER read your magazine again," another reader wrote. "I will NEVER buy anything offered in your magazine. You can kiss my red blooded, white American ass!!!" "Wow," wrote another. "Talk about 'shooting yourself in the foot.' What are you thinking by not listening to the response of your subscribers? You're making an EPIC mistake." Gun rights advocates seem to agree. "Anyone who says 'I believe in the Second Amendment but –' does not believe in the Second Amendment," Robert Farago wrote in a blog post on TheTruthAboutGuns.com. "They are not friends, they are not frenemies, they are enemies of The People of the Gun." Farago also took issue with Metcalf's assertion that the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech doesn't mean you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. "Yes. Yes you can," Farago wrote. "It’s just that you’re legally responsible for what happens next." Farago added: "The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right, stemming from our natural right of self-defense. It doesn’t require belief, faith or political justification." The magazine did not immediately return a request for comment. But gun control advocates are cheering Guns & Ammo's decision to publish the column. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence shared a link to a story about Metcalf's column on its Facebook page. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on November 07, 2013, 04:04:46 am Quote **Yes, enemies come from WITHIN, NOT from without like these Obama-types! Yeah, it's becoming more apparent that the socialists have been installing their kind all over the place, laying in wait to strike. This guy is obviously a government plant. Same thing happened with the NRA. Turns out, they too are nothing but stooges for the government. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 09, 2013, 01:04:07 pm http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/11/08/Gabby-Giffords-And-Her-Husband-Launch-Veterans-for-Gun-Control
11/8/13 Gabby Giffords, Mark Kelly Launch Veterans Group for Gun Control The gun control PAC of Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, is launching a new initiative, "Veterans for Responsible Solutions." According to CNN, the new initiative "will support Giffords and Kelly's wider efforts by bringing to bear the experience of military veterans who've sworn to defend the Second Amendment." Kelly, a veteran himself, said he shares the views of the veterans in the new initiative. He also spoke of all the guns he and his wife keep in their home for self-defense and target shooting. Along with Kelly, Veterans for Responsible Solutions say they are not seeking "to repeal or limit the Second Amendment." They just want "universal background checks." **Translation - they want their cake AND eat it too! Neither Giffords, Kelly, nor Veterans for Responsible Solutions addressed the fact that universal background checks will require gun registration in order to be effective. Nor did they address Breitbart News' reports that universal background checks would not have stopped the heinous crimes of the Sandy Hook Elementary, D.C. Navy Yard, or LAX shootings. CNN did report that the couple's push for universal background checks has proven "politically unpalatable." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 10, 2013, 03:06:34 pm Massachusetts Moves To Inspect Gun Owners’ Homes
Bureaucrat Proposes Violating Fourth and Second Amendments to Protect Children In Massachusetts, a bureaucrat wants police to enter private residences and “safeguard” guns under the pretense that violating the Constitution will be good for the children. Barry Greenfield, a Swampscott, Massachusetts selectman, cited a state law requiring citizens to keep their firearms locked up and rendered inoperable. “We need the ability to enforce the state law,” Greenfield said. In an email to a constituent concerned about the proposal, Greenfield cited school shootings. “The research I have read states that 65% or more of school shootings are caused by kids having access to their parents guns. It would be great to avoid another situation like that,” he wrote. “I’m a volunteer elected official. I’m trying to do what I can to prevent Sandy Hook happening in my town,” Greenfield added. Fellow selectman Glenn Kessler said “he would like to see all the interested parties including the police chief, the town’s legal counsel and citizens talk about the issue before selectmen take action,” according to the Swampscott Patch. Kessler said there are civil liberty matters to consider. Although Swampscott’s selectmen took no action on Greenfield’s suggestion, most indicated they may hold a discussion on a gun inspection proposal. In February, similar legislation was pulled in Washington state. Under the proposed law, residents who refused to allow cops to search their homes without a warrant faced a year in jail. Democrats who proposed the bill faced withering criticism from the public and the bill was dropped. http://www.infowars.com/bureaucrat-proposes-violating-fourth-and-second-amendments-to-protect-children/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on November 11, 2013, 03:05:01 am Are they going to demand inspections of mattresses to make sure the tags haven't been torn off too? ::)
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 14, 2013, 07:19:34 pm http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/11/13/GOP-Rep-Joins-Democrats-In-Effort-To-Bring-Expanded-Background-Checks-Back-For-Vote
11/13/13 Peter King Joins Dem to Push New Bill for Expanded Background Checks Representative Peter King (R-NY) is co-sponsoring expanded background check legislation with Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA). According to The Hill, the legislation is "identical" to the bill Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) pushed earlier this year. It would end private sales at gun shows and private sales from classified ads located online. It would also force sellers in both these settings to sell their firearms through a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder in the way Colorado state legislators have forced residents of the state to handle all gun sales. King and Thompson are pushing this bill "to weed out felons, spousal abusers, illegal immigrants, and other categories of prohibited buyers." As with the failed Senate gun bill earlier this year, the expanded background checks in the proposed King/Thompson bill would not have stopped the LAX shooter, the New Jersey mall shooter, Nidal Hasan's shooting spree at Ft. Hood, or the heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary. Title: Ohio lawmakers advance broad 'stand your ground' bill Post by: Mark on November 21, 2013, 10:21:18 am Ohio lawmakers advance broad 'stand your ground' bill
COLUMBUS, Ohio (November 21, 2013) - Opponents including black legislators, youth and church groups decried the dangers of an Ohio "stand your ground" self-defense proposal on Wednesday, as the expansive gun measure cleared the state House. Protesters at one point interrupted the lengthy debate, their shouts gaveled down by House Speaker William Batchelder, before the measure passed on a 62-27 vote. It now goes to the Senate. Under current law, residents need not retreat before using force if they are lawfully in their homes, vehicles or the vehicle of an immediate family member. The measure would expand the circumstances where the use of force trumps the duty to retreat to public settings, such as stores and streets. At least 22 states have similar laws, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The laws generally eliminate a person's duty to retreat in the face of a serious physical threat. At least nine of those state laws include language stating one may "stand his or her ground." Ohio's bill doesn't include such language. The bill's sponsor, state Rep. Terry Johnson, has taken issue with his measure being compared to Florida's law. "No matter how many times you say 'stand your ground,' this is not a 'stand your ground' bill," Johnson, a McDermott Republican told his colleagues. Supporters of the provision say no person should have to retreat in order to ensure his or her safety. Johnson said Democrats' depictions of gun-related crimes "just reinforces my resolve" for the need of the bill. More than a dozen lawmakers have signed on as co-sponsors to Johnson's bill, which also would ease certain license requirements for carrying concealed weapons and spell out how the state's attorney general enters into agreements with other states to allow Ohioans with concealed weapons permits to carry firearms among those states. The Ohio Attorney General's Office recently reported almost 82,200 new concealed-carry licenses were issued in the first nine months of 2012, more than any one calendar year since permitting began in 2004. Beside the self-defense provisions, the bill also would also set up reciprocity license agreements with other states that honor Ohio concealed-carry permits. Following House passage, the bill would head next to the Senate. Among changes, it would: — Eliminate the requirement that a person reside in Ohio to receive or renew a concealed handgun license; — Eliminate the current 12-hour training requirement, substituting a minimum of four training hours in the safe handling and use of a firearm; — Allow investigators with the attorney general's office to carry firearms when investigating offenses related to the Medicaid program or involving abuse or neglect in nursing homes and residential care facilities; — Waive certain concealed-carry license renewal requirements for members of the armed forces, Peace Corps or foreign service while on active duty and for six months afterward. http://www.onenewsnow.com/ap/legal/ohio-lawmakers-advance-broad-stand-your-ground-bill Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on November 21, 2013, 02:16:34 pm Quote — Allow investigators with the attorney general's office to carry firearms when investigating offenses related to the Medicaid program or involving abuse or neglect in nursing homes and residential care facilities; That's a problem. Lawyers are not police officers. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 24, 2013, 10:06:57 pm http://www.kmov.com/news/local/East-St-Louis-gun-exchange-rounds-up-130-guns-233223601.html
East St. Louis gun exchange rounds up 130 guns 11/24/13 EAST ST. LOUIS, Ill. (AP) -- Authorities say an East St. Louis weekend gun exchange rounded up 130 guns. Saturday's event allowed the first 100 people to get $100 grocery store gift cards. All 100 of the gift cards were gone about an hour after the event started. Officials say the guns were allowed to be turned in with no questions asked. St. Clair County Richard Watson says the event was a success. He says that people who came in said the money would help with Thanksgiving dinners. He says the guns will be destroyed. An event last year took in seven guns. According to St. Clair County State's Attorney Brendan Kelly, the gift card money came from cash seized during drug raids. The guns turned in included long shot guns and rifles with scopes. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 27, 2013, 11:13:10 am And So It Begins: New York Sending Out Gun Confiscation Notices
(http://truthaboutguns.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot-2013-11-27-at-9.31.12-AM.png) New York’s SAFE Act is a bad, bad thing. It requires people to register, sell or transfer (out of state) “assault rifles” and “high capacity” magazines. Many Empire State gun and standard capacity ammunition magazine owners have complied. Many have not. So, at some point, the State’s gonna go get ‘em. People on both sides of the law enforcement divide will die and the s will hit the fan. Meanwhile, there it is: the reason why expanded background checks, indeed all background checks and any type of registration, set the stage for confiscation. And tyranny. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/11/robert-farago/begins-new-york-sending-gun-confiscation-notices/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 27, 2013, 01:34:57 pm Colorado Lawmaker Announces Abrupt Resignation, Becomes the Third Pro-Gun Control Dem. Out of Office
Colorado state Sen. Evie Hudak announced Wednesday that she is resigning from office “effective immediately,” signaling that she would rather step down than lose a recall election over her support for more stringent gun laws in her state. Colorado state Sen. Evie Hudak announced her decision to resign Wednesday. (Image source: eviehudak.com) Loss of a recall election would result in Republicans gaining control of the state senate. News of her impending resignation, which was first reported by KDVR-TV, would seem to throw a wrench into earlier hopes that Colorado would serve as a blueprint for a national push for more gun laws. “In the interest of preserving the progress made over the last year, I am resigning as state senator for district 19, effective immediately,” Hudak said in her letter of resignation. Hudak’s early exit means she avoids becoming the third Democrat to face a tough recall election after supporting the state’s new gun control laws. Democratic state Sens. John Morse and Angela Giron tried to fight their recall elections but were both booted from office and replaced with Republicans. Hudak and fellow Democrats reportedly believed recall efforts against her would have been successful. After conferring with top Colorado Democrats, the state senator finalized her decision to resign late Tuesday, according to KDVR-TV. “Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine,” Hudak said in her resignation letter. “That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. … By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.” Before she announced her resignation, Hudak opponents were busy collecting signatures for the Dec. 3 deadline. Opponents had reportedly collected 92 percent of the signatures needed to force a special recall election, organizer Mike McAlpine told radio host Mike Rosen this week. But by resigning early, Hudak has ensured that the Democratic vacancy committee will appoint someone to take her place. This keeps the state Senate in Democratic hands until at least November, when Hudak’s replacement will be forced to stand for election. Colorado Democrat Rep. Tracy Kraft could serve as a possible replacement for Hudak, KDVR-TV notes, but it is unclear whether the congresswoman would give up her seat for the resigning senator. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/27/colorado-lawmaker-announces-abrupt-resignation-becomes-the-third-pro-gun-control-dem-out-of-office/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on November 27, 2013, 01:42:07 pm The thing is, that list shows 3 rifles, each a .22 LR, the Marlin uses a 7-round clip, the AR-7 uses 8-round or larger, and the last one I think 7 rounds, but of course larger capacity clips are available for all of them.
Notice they set the clip limit at 5, yet all those the smallest clip is more than the limit. They effectively banned those style rifles just from a clip limit, unless you want to unreasonably modify the weapon contrary to it's original design. http://voices.yahoo.com/a-rifle-review-marlin-25n-classic-22-caliber-1743741.html (http://voices.yahoo.com/a-rifle-review-marlin-25n-classic-22-caliber-1743741.html) http://www.lisc.net/p628.htm (http://www.lisc.net/p628.htm) How do you modify a rifle, or pistol, to not be able to use a larger capacity clip? Close it up and make it a breach loader? Under their "options", they demand to know where the firearm will be located outside New York City, as a means of proof it's not in NY of course! It's none of New York's business where the firearm is outside NYC , especially if you move outside the city. This whole deal is completely stupid police-state thuggery. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 27, 2013, 09:05:56 pm Honestly, too little, too late - for one, I don't think state politicians even care b/c they only get less than minimum wage while only coming to work in the state legislature only a couple of times a year(it's really nothing more than resume padders and wanting more influence in their respective communities to promote their main professions - so getting this part-time gig is a no-lose situation for them). Two, this gun control law was passed LAST YEAR - why are they waiting until NOW, a year later, to recall these politicians? And besides - these same people who are calling to recall these gun control politicians are pretty much the same crowd who supported gun control politicians like Ronald Reagan, George Sr, and Mitt Romney over the many years. Hate to say it, but they missed the train.
Ultimately, if anyone thinks putting their faith in certain politicians will change things, they better think again. Colorado Lawmaker Announces Abrupt Resignation, Becomes the Third Pro-Gun Control Dem. Out of Office Colorado state Sen. Evie Hudak announced Wednesday that she is resigning from office “effective immediately,” signaling that she would rather step down than lose a recall election over her support for more stringent gun laws in her state. Colorado state Sen. Evie Hudak announced her decision to resign Wednesday. (Image source: eviehudak.com) Loss of a recall election would result in Republicans gaining control of the state senate. News of her impending resignation, which was first reported by KDVR-TV, would seem to throw a wrench into earlier hopes that Colorado would serve as a blueprint for a national push for more gun laws. “In the interest of preserving the progress made over the last year, I am resigning as state senator for district 19, effective immediately,” Hudak said in her letter of resignation. Hudak’s early exit means she avoids becoming the third Democrat to face a tough recall election after supporting the state’s new gun control laws. Democratic state Sens. John Morse and Angela Giron tried to fight their recall elections but were both booted from office and replaced with Republicans. Hudak and fellow Democrats reportedly believed recall efforts against her would have been successful. After conferring with top Colorado Democrats, the state senator finalized her decision to resign late Tuesday, according to KDVR-TV. “Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine,” Hudak said in her resignation letter. “That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. … By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.” Before she announced her resignation, Hudak opponents were busy collecting signatures for the Dec. 3 deadline. Opponents had reportedly collected 92 percent of the signatures needed to force a special recall election, organizer Mike McAlpine told radio host Mike Rosen this week. But by resigning early, Hudak has ensured that the Democratic vacancy committee will appoint someone to take her place. This keeps the state Senate in Democratic hands until at least November, when Hudak’s replacement will be forced to stand for election. Colorado Democrat Rep. Tracy Kraft could serve as a possible replacement for Hudak, KDVR-TV notes, but it is unclear whether the congresswoman would give up her seat for the resigning senator. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/27/colorado-lawmaker-announces-abrupt-resignation-becomes-the-third-pro-gun-control-dem-out-of-office/ Title: House Passes Ban On Plastic Guns As Senate Eyes Broader Reforms Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 05, 2013, 05:05:13 pm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/gun-control-chuck-schumer_n_4379325.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
12/3/13 House Passes Ban On Plastic Guns As Senate Eyes Broader Reforms WASHINGTON -- Something bizarre happened in the House of Representatives on Tuesday: Republicans quietly passed gun control legislation. The bill, which renews the 1988 Undetectable Firearms Act, faced so little opposition in the House that it was only debated for 10 minutes and passed on a voice vote. It's the only gun-related measure to get a House vote since Democrats launched a major push for action on gun violence in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting late last year. Tuesday's vote doesn't implement new gun laws -- it just extends a current one banning guns that don't contain enough metal to trigger X-ray machines or metal detectors. The law was originally signed by President Ronald Reagan and was renewed by Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, passing Congress with broad bipartisan support each time. It is currently scheduled to expire on Dec. 9. While the House didn't make any changes to the law, Senate Democrats are poised to try to expand it. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) will put forward a bill on Monday, the same day the law is set to expire, containing a provision targeting plastic guns made with 3-D printing technology. Specifically, his bill would require that guns contain a piece of metal that is intrinsic to its operation, such as in the barrel or the trigger handle, rather than an extraneous piece that could be removed before a gun is put through a metal detector. "It's hard to understand why [the House] would keep that loophole in the law," Schumer said during a call with reporters. "Why did they do it? The most extreme elements of the far right who actually believe there should be no restrictions on any types of plastic guns at all ... they pushed for the weakest thing they thought they could achieve." Schumer's bill would also extend the law for only one year, versus the 10-year reauthorization in the House bill. The shorter extension would give Democrats a chance to revisit the gun debate before a decade has passed. Aware that his proposal faces an uphill battle, Schumer said to expect the Senate to bring up the "better than nothing" House-passed bill if his goes down. Still, he said he was willing to let the law temporarily expire in order to fight to pass his bill. "I'd rather have one day where we don't have a law and pass the tougher law on Tuesday than pass a 10-year law with nothing else," Schumer said. Gun rights groups are divided on whether to even extend the current law. While National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told The Huffington Post that the group doesn't have a problem with the House bill, since it is "simply reauthorizing current law," Michael Hammond, legal counsel for the Gun Owners of America, said his group wants the entire law scrapped. "It was poorly drafted and slammed through in 1988," said Hammond. "It was an exercise in trying to do something about a problem that didn't exist, in a way that supposedly made Congress look good but hasn't been thought out." Both groups emphasized that they completely oppose Schumer's bill. "The NRA has been working for months to thwart expansion of the UFA by Sen. Chuck Schumer and others," Arulanandam said. "We will continue to aggressively fight any expansion of the UFA or any other proposal that would infringe on our Second Amendment rights." For their part, House Democrats said they wished the House-passed bill went further, but with six days left until the law expires, they seemed resigned to the fact that Republicans wouldn't support an expanded bill. "It looks like the choice before the country and the Congress is whether to let this ban on plastics expire or not. It should not expire," said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-N.J.). "We're going to have to practice the art of the possible and pass the best law that we can." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 06, 2013, 12:59:18 am Voice vote eh? Cowards!
This is my take way back in 2008...(I wrote this under a different profile name "Bossgator" back then. I actually got this copy from of all places "WOY" because me and Brandon who set up WOY use to work together at another site years ago. Then "Brandon" and his sidekick "FranG" got all racial and we parted ways) http://splitbabyniblet.blogspot.com/2008/02/voice-vote-cowards-secret-weapon-by.html (http://splitbabyniblet.blogspot.com/2008/02/voice-vote-cowards-secret-weapon-by.html) Quote Voice Vote – The Coward's Secret Weapon February 1st, 2008 With the advent of C-Span, I suspect most Americans have at least had a glimpse at the voting process in the House and Senate, but it may also be safe to say few have really taken the time to learn exactly how voting is done by our elected representatives. Until recently, I was counted among the many that have little understanding of the process. Now I know just how much I don’t know! While researching various bills via the website GovTrack, http://www.govtrack.us/, I noticed something peculiar. When you look up a given bill, such as HR2640, The NICS Improvements Amendment Act of 2007, take a look at the section “Votes on Passage”, and you’ll see how each representative voted on this unconstitutional bill more infamously known as “The Veterans Disarmament Act”. See it? That’s right! There was no record kept of the vote. Not only did the vote of each representative not get recorded in the Journal, but the total number of votes cast was not recorded either. How is that, you say? Are not our elected officials accountable for how they speak for their constituents? Well, it seems the cowards have found a secret weapon they can use to avoid documenting how they voted on all those controversial bills that they feel the public might not like. It’s called “voice voting.” At first, I thought there was some kind of reasonable explanation for voting in such a manner, such as National Security, but once I started looking into this type of voting, the picture became rather murky at best. It seems this type of voting has been going on for as long as we’ve had the Constitution, and the history of voice voting dates back to long before our founding fathers set foot in the New World. You might say the concept has been around as long as humans have had an opinion. Since this is not a lesson in history, I’ll stick to current affairs, and that is, my question “How in the world can our politicians legally vote in such a manner?” To attempt to find that answer, we need to take a look at the Constitution. Constitutional Deception? It seems to me that our focus should be on what Constitutional grounds do vice votes take place. In Article 1, Section 5, clause 3, we find the following… “Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their judgment require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on any question shall, at the desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the journal.” Interesting how so many decisions pertaining to the actions of Congress are left up to its own members. This is nothing more than having the fox stand guard over the hen house. In theory, we would expect these elected representatives to honor their oath of office, and in most cases, they do. There are times though these same politicians feel an overwhelming need to cover their own ass, and find themselves interpreting the law to suit their own means. And if that isn’t enough, they write a law that fits. The above quote from Section 5 at first glance sounds like a reasonable resolution to situations that may present themselves from time to time. The operative word is “may.” Until challenged in court, interpretation is a personal thing, widely open to speculation. No where else do we find within the Constitution any mention of authorization for secrecy. So, that being the case, one must assume that Congress decided that voice voting is authorized by Section 5. Let’s take a closer look at the exact wording. It starts off with…”Each House shall keep a journal…” Okay, the wording here seems really straightforward. The Congress and Senate are mandated to keep a journal of their proceedings. They also are required to publish said journal, as in make public, periodically. The next question is, are there any exceptions to this rule? Yes, the very next part clearly addresses one possible exception; when the representatives determine they “require secrecy.” But it does not say how they determine when secrecy is required. That’s the problem I feel we are facing today. Who or what determines what should be kept secret? Before we determine who has the authority to withhold information from the public, we need to step back, because the initial question is still not answered. It’s subtle, and I overlooked it many times, till it finally hit me. The point is not whether the House and Senate should be voting by voice, it’s about the keeping of the journal. Clause 3 clearly states that the journal is to be kept, and then it says when ( why it should be secret is not addressed) information can be withheld as secret. The issue is of publishing the content of the journal, not if it should be entered into the journal. This clause is tricky, and clearly can be interpreted in more than one way. I contend that all information is to be entered into the journal. Once that takes place, then a decision may be made not to publish certain journal content. But the information still must be entered. This is where the House and Senate have been fudging the law! They have decided for themselves that the Constitution gives them the authority to not enter information in the journal, when in fact it says everything is to be in the journal. At the same time, the House and Senate have the authority to withhold disclosure of what is in the journal that they deem secret. That does not relieve them of their duty to record ALL actions of the House and Senate. Not all info really needs to be known by everyone in a fully open environment. However, while the public may not need to know, at the very least, there must be record for judicial oversight. Cops don’t tell the public everything, till after the case is over, but they have records none the less. It’s a matter of “need to know”. But somebody still needs to know, and if they don’t enter vote details in the journal via the voice vote, how can the judicial branch fully investigate misdeeds? Exactly... This is blatant misuse and twisting of the Constitution yet again, especially when you understand how a voice vote takes place. For the exact legal process, you have to look at the House Rules Manual. [109th Congress House Rules - http://www.gpoaccess.gov/hrm/browse_110.html] And for details on who is responsible for making up rules for the House, go here: http://www.rules.house.gov/ Once more, when looking at the House Rules, and I have read most of it, you see another example of legislative excess. Throughout government, there is all kinds of documentation and very specific procedural steps, and that is where cowards hide; in the vastness of legalese. Part of the all-encompassing web of rules and laws, our representatives have apparently decided to use the law they wrote themselves to hide how they vote, or not vote, on a given bill. They do this under the guise of being allowed to keep secrets. When you take a look at bills that were passed by voice vote, many of them makes one wonder what could possibly be so important in that bill that they decided they must keep secret how the bill was voted on. The bill is fully disclosed to the public, and is entered into the Congressional Record, yet who voted, and how they voted, and the number of votes cast, is not recorded. Now, granted there is a procedure in the House Rules Manual for contesting a call for a voice vote, but it appears that process is not easily accomplished, especially when you factor in time constraints due to the raw number of bills being churned out each day. Voice Vote has been around a long time, and there are plenty of situations where this type of voting is purely innocent and expedient. Then there are those times when it appears that no record of how an official voted is nothing more than politically convenient. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 06, 2013, 12:14:45 pm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/06/gabby-giffords-gun-control_n_4398145.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
12/6/13 Gabby Giffords' New Gun Control PAC Takes Big Step Forward Title: Re: House Passes Ban On Plastic Guns As Senate Eyes Broader Reforms Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 06, 2013, 12:43:56 pm Gun Control Coming to the Senate Floor on Monday
12/6/13 http://gunowners.org/alert12062013.htm The U.S. House of Representatives did a very dangerous thing Tuesday -- and, apparently, it did so with the consent of one gun organization. By voice vote, the House slammed through a ten-year re-authorization of the poorly drafted 1988 plastic gun ban. Lest anyone be confused about how the anti-gun Left views this, USA Today crowed, on the front page of Wednesday's newspaper that the “HOUSE SAYS YES TO ONE GUN BILL -- Plastic gun ban only firearm legislation to pass since November.” Taken alone, this gives the Obama administration, if it chooses, another three years to use the 1988 law to ban large numbers of guns. But there is an even bigger danger: Chuck Schumer held a press conference the same day to indicate that he will use the House-passed bill as a vehicle to pass even more gun control. We don't expect to know Schumer's bill number or language before he actually offers it, but it will purport to deal with guns from 3-D printers, while actually being much broader. So here's what we are doing: We are asking our friends in the Senate to put a “hold” on any effort by Schumer to amend the House bill. The Senate will only be in session four or five days next week before the House goes out for the year, and Schumer may not be able to get time on the Senate floor without “unanimous consent” from all senators. So, by doing this, we would force Schumer to give up on his vehicle for banning printer-guns if he wanted any reauthorization of the 1988 bill. If Schumer remains adamant, there will be no re-authorization at all. Even if he capitulates, we'll see what happens. It's not a perfect outcome. But we think it's an outcome we can probably achieve. Title: Re: House Passes Ban On Plastic Guns As Senate Eyes Broader Reforms Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 10, 2013, 10:55:45 am http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20131210&id=17178272
Congress renews undetectable gun ban just in time December 10, 2013 3:15 AM ET. WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress' easy renewal of an expiring ban on undetectable plastic guns belies the larger reality that one year after the horrific school shooting in Newtown, Conn., major new firearms restrictions have little chance of enactment anytime soon. Lawmakers took an easy step Monday when the Democratic-run Senate unanimously gave final congressional approval to a bill adding another decade to the prohibition against guns that can slip by airport metal detectors and X-ray machines. The National Rifle Association, which has helped scuttle firearms restrictions this year, did not oppose the extension. Without action, the ban would have expired Tuesday. The Republican-led House approved the bill last week. But the NRA did oppose an effort by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and other Democrats to strengthen the law by requiring plastic firearms to have a permanent metal piece. Senate Republicans defeated that proposal by rejecting a request by Schumer to push it through the Senate unanimously. Some plastic firearms technically obey the quarter-century-old law with a detachable metal part that can be slipped off to evade airport security. Democrats said the stricter language was needed in an era when improved and increasingly accessible 3-D printers can produce functioning guns. "It's time that we recognize that the future is here, plastic guns are real," said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. President Barack Obama, traveling to Africa for ceremonies honoring the late South African president Nelson Mandela, signed the bill before midnight using a remote signing device called an autopen, the White House said. Monday's vote came five days before the first anniversary of the nightmare at Newtown's Sandy Hook Elementary School, where a gunman murdered 20 children and six staffers before killing himself. In the year since, Congress has approved no new gun curbs, even though Obama and Democratic House and Senate leaders made such restrictions a top agenda item. Their major defeat was last April's Senate rejection of expanded background checks for firearms buyers, which are designed to keep weapons from criminals and the mentally ill. Also defeated were proposed bans on assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines. None of the plans ever came to votes in the House. That has left the gun control movement divided, with some wanting to continue pressing those issues while others prefer settling for more modest gains, such as strengthening mental health programs. **Rick Warren was pushing for the latter(doing so while exploiting his son) during the Piers Morgan interview on Fri. Monday's brief Senate debate underscored the divisions — and mistrust — between the two parties on the issue. Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested that Schumer's effort to tighten the curb might threaten technologies used by legitimate gun makers. He said lawmakers should study the issue, but added that Schumer's recent introduction of his bill showed "the real objectives were things other than just getting an extension." Schumer said he had "no ulterior motive" and expressed optimism about reaching compromise with Grassley. But Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., used stronger language, saying the outcome illustrated a city where extremists often "force common sense to yield to their ideology." Underscoring the issue's political sensitivity, both of Monday's Senate votes were on unanimous consent requests. That meant any single senator could scuttle the proposals by objecting. It also meant the votes were by voice and that no individual senators' votes were recorded. For a handful of Democratic senators seeking re-election next year in GOP-leaning states, the day's votes could have been difficult. Plastic guns were in their infancy when President Ronald Reagan and Congress first enacted the ban against undetectable firearms in 1988, and when it was renewed in 1998 and 2003. But such weapons have become a growing threat and can now be produced by 3-D printers, which are becoming better and more affordable. Supporters of tightening the rules say the 10-year renewal helps the gun lobby because it reduces Democrats' ability to revisit the issue. With Saturday's Newtown anniversary approaching, Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., a psychologist, plans to announce legislation Thursday aimed at boosting federal mental health programs, including treatment, research and training for workers who respond to emergencies. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 10, 2013, 11:07:49 am Quote It also meant the votes were by voice and that no individual senators' votes were recorded. For a handful of Democratic senators seeking re-election next year in GOP-leaning states, the day's votes could have been difficult. See, "voice vote" was never intended to be used that way. It's a misuse of procedure for purely political reasons, which I thought was illegal, and definitely immoral and deceitful. If you cannot stand by your vote, you need to get out of being a representative of the people. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 13, 2013, 04:01:49 pm http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-confirms-chemical-arms-were-used-repeatedly-002807901.html
U.N. confirms chemical arms were used repeatedly in Syria 12/13/13 UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Chemical weapons were likely used in five out of seven attacks investigated by U.N. experts in Syria, where a 2 1/2-year civil war has killed more than 100,000 people, according to the final report of a U.N. inquiry published on Thursday. U.N. investigators said the deadly nerve agent sarin was likely used in four incidents, in one case on a large scale. The report noted that in several cases the victims included government soldiers and civilians, though it was not always possible to establish with certainty any direct links between the attacks, the victims and the alleged sites of the incidents. "The United Nations Mission concludes that chemical weapons have been used in the ongoing conflict between the parties in the Syrian Arab Republic," the final report by chief U.N. investigator Ake Sellstrom said. Syria's U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari and the opposition Syrian National Coalition did immediately comment on the 82-page report. The investigation found likely use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Assal, near the northern city of Aleppo, in March; in Saraqeb, near the northern city of Idlib, in April; and in Jobar and Ashrafiat Sahnaya, near Damascus, in August. As initially reported by Sellstrom in September, there was "clear and convincing" evidence that sarin was used on a large-scale against civilians in the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21, killing hundreds of people. In the final report on Thursday, the experts said sarin had likely also been used on a small-scale in Jobar, Saraqeb and Ashrafiat Sahnaya. The inquiry was only looking at whether chemical weapons were used, not who used them. The Syrian government and the opposition have accused each other of using chemical weapons, and both have denied it. TOTAL 16 ALLEGATIONS Rebels have seized all kinds of weapons from military depots across Syria, according to the United Nations. Western powers say the rebels do not have access to chemical arms. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon established the Sellstrom investigation after the Syrian government wrote to Ban accusing the rebels of carrying out the chemical weapons attack in Khan al-Assal. Sellstrom delivered the final report to Ban on Thursday. Ban will brief the U.N. General Assembly on the report on Friday and the U.N. Security Council on Monday. "The use of chemical weapons is a grave violation of international law and an affront to our shared humanity," Ban said. "We need to remain vigilant to ensure that these awful weapons are eliminated, not only in Syria, but everywhere." The United Nations has now received 16 reports of possible chemical weapons use in Syria, mainly from the Syrian government, Britain, France and the United States. The experts looked closely at seven of those cases. The U.N. experts were from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the World Health Organization. France, Britain and the United States said the technical details of Sellstrom's initial September report on the August 21 attack pointed to government culpability, while Syria and Russia blamed the rebels. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government agreed to destroy its chemical weapons arsenal after the August 21 Ghouta attack, which had led to threats of U.S. air strikes. Syria also acceded to the Chemical Weapons Convention. The U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution in September to enforce the deal, brokered by the United States and Russia, which requires Syria to account fully for its chemical weapons and for the arsenal to be removed and destroyed by mid-2014. The Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has been charged with supervising the elimination of Syria's chemical arsenal. Title: New York City Confiscating Rifles And Shotguns Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2013, 08:41:29 am New York City Confiscating Rifles And Shotguns
12/6/13 The New York City Police Department (NYPD) is sending out letters telling gun owners to turn over their rifles and shotguns — or else face the consequences. New York City’s ban on rifles and shotguns that hold more than five rounds is now being enforced, according to a letter the NYPD is sending out to targeted city gun owners. “It appears you are in possession of a rifle and/or Shotgun (listed below) that has an ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition. Rifles and shotguns capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition are unlawful to possess in New York City, as per NYC Administrative Code 10-306 (b).” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/06/new-york-city-confiscating-rifles-and-shotguns/#ixzz2nT5kDa9Z Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 18, 2013, 10:42:32 am from a new VC article...
(http://i1.wp.com/vigilantcitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/1185088_593075677397554_967140689_n.jpg?resize=514%2C720) (http://i1.wp.com/vigilantcitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/1186226_593073180731137_432799590_n-e1387312499280.jpg?resize=500%2C231) It was placed inside a park in Newtown. Speaking of which, one year later, is there any new information about the alleged shooter? No, nothing at all. (http://i0.wp.com/vigilantcitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/BN-AJ905_nyhook_G_20131113171915.jpg?resize=553%2C369) In case someone wanted to go investigate the Sandy Hook crime scene and verify the official version of the story, here is what left of Sandy Hook Elementary School. That is how you destroy evidence. Read more at http://vigilantcitizen.com/pics-of-the-month/symbolic-pics-month-1213/#TLfm8QBgpyCYgjPU.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2013, 10:50:22 am Yeah, for years and years and years, they've been slowly chipping away at gun control - don't let that "defeated" legislation last Spring fool you thinking it was a "victory" against Obama. It's not like they're trying to do it all at once, and the NRA/GOA are controlled-opposition groups that work for the enemy. Remember Ronald Reagan pushed for universal background checks when he was President, and ended up chipping a little away when all was said and done. And keep in mind too the Catholic Church and other "influential" evangelicals like Franklin Graham and Rick Warren support gun control.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 18, 2013, 11:49:30 am And just what is that kid doing in that graphic with his hands?
(http://victoriajacksonshow.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/jay-z-pyramid-symbol.jpg) (http://cdn.blogs.sheknows.com/realitytvmagazine.sheknows.com/2013/02/Did-Beyonce-Flash-Illuminati-Sign-During-Super-Bowl-Performance-455x386.jpg) (http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/michael-jackson-illuminati-freemason-young-eye-of-horus-satanic-murder-dead-body-death-conspiracy-rihanna-beyonce-lil-wayne-omer-bhatti-prince-paris-blanket-kids-children-5-janet-secret.jpg) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2013, 11:50:04 am I was wondering the same thing.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 18, 2013, 12:08:31 pm People might think this whole "gangsta" hip hop Illuminati stuff is all Jay-Z. Nope. Not even original, he stole the concept at best, but more likely he's just another wannabe promoter of the enemy and their carnal organization. Even Michael Jackson was flashing the signs as a kid, long before Jay-Z and the hip hop crowd. This all comes from LONG before these people.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 18, 2013, 12:19:39 pm People might think this whole "gangsta" hip hop Illuminati stuff is all Jay-Z. Nope. Not even original, he stole the concept at best, but more likely he's just another wannabe promoter of the enemy and their carnal organization. Even Michael Jackson was flashing the signs as a kid, long before Jay-Z and the hip hop crowd. This all comes from LONG before these people. Yeah, this is how, pretty much, the people who run the show behind the world's systems communicate with each other. I remember I saw a show on the History Channel 2 years ago over N@zi Germany leaders and their ties to the occult - they didn't go too far in exposing them(not surprising b/c the History Channel is part of the NWO MSM machine), but nonetheless they said some interesting things. One of them being that that N@zi swastika symbol was started being used MUCH LONG before by the false Buddhist and Hindu religions. Now guess what - a lot of this has infiltrated Churchianity - so pretty much whenever a Freemason, let's say, watches some CCM band flashing these similar hand signs, they'll see how far infiltrated the occult has gone into Churchianity. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 30, 2013, 08:17:34 am Don't think isn't a good thing, right? ???
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/conn-gun-owners-rush-register-130343339.html Conn. gun owners rush to register weapons, ammo Conn. gun owners create last-minute crush to register certain firearms, ammo by Dec. 31 12/30/13 HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut gun owners are rushing to register certain firearms and ammunition that will be considered illegal contraband in the new year. People have been lining up early in the morning at the state Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection's headquarters in Middletown in recent days to turn in applications for assault weapons certificates and high-capacity magazine declaration forms so they can legally keep the items. Under a wide-ranging gun control law, passed earlier this year in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting in Newtown, gun owners have until Tuesday to submit the paperwork. Michael Lawlor, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's undersecretary for criminal justice, predicted a flood of registrations over the final days of 2013. "It sounds like a lot of these folks were holding off on doing it in anticipation of a potential decision or something," Lawlor said, referring to pending legal challenges to the state law, which expanded the definition of assault weapons in Connecticut to include more banned weapons. The law also bans the sale or purchase of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Like the newly defined assault weapons, existing magazines can be kept so long as they're registered with the state. "One thing is clear," Lawlor said. "If you haven't registered it, on the following day, it is completely illegal contraband" starting on Jan. 1. The Connecticut Citizens Defense League, which is participating in a legal challenge of the new law, has been working to remind gun owners that the deadline to register and declare the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines is approaching quickly. "Many people are still not aware of the law itself, or the actual date of implementation," President Scott Wilson said. "While CCDL wholeheartedly believes that this law is unconstitutional, we want to make sure that law-abiding gun owners do not become felons on Jan. 1." Wilson said his organization is particularly concerned that people may not be aware they're affected by the law because many handgun magazines and semi-automatic rifle magazines with a capacity to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition were sold standard along with guns before April 4, the last day people could legally purchase or sell those weapons and magazines in Connecticut. There are exceptions for members of the military, law enforcement and others. Wilson has estimated there may be as many as 20,000 weapons in Connecticut affected by the new law. Lt. J. Paul Vance, a spokesman for the Connecticut State Police, said the agency is trying to make the process as smooth as possible for those looking to register their weapons and magazines. For example, notaries have been stationed at the DESPP headquarters to assist applicants. To obtain an assault weapon certificate, gun owners need to submit proof such as a valid sales receipt that they purchased the weapon before April 4. They also can submit a sworn affidavit that must be notarized. The application requires information such as the individual's name, address, telephone number, motor vehicle operator's license, sex, height, weight and thumbprint, as well as information about the weapon, including the serial number, model and any unique markings. The large-capacity magazine declaration form includes much of the same information, including the applicant's address and driver's license number. Under the new law, the registered large-capacity magazines can be kept fully filled at the owner's home. They can also be taken to a licensed shooting range or gun club and filled to capacity there. Ultimately, advocates hope the law will prompt people to turn in the magazines. "I think over time, there's just going to be fewer and fewer of those in circulation," Lawlor said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on December 30, 2013, 12:33:40 pm It's so obvious that the government does these things not because of "public safety", but the safety of government. All this does is tell the government what kind of resistance they might encounter in armed conflicts with the public.
Title: White House announces two new 'executive actions' on guns Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 03, 2014, 04:26:56 pm http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/03/22163660-white-house-announces-two-new-executive-actions-on-guns?lite
1/3/14 White House announces two new 'executive actions' on guns The Obama administration is proposing two more executive actions that it says will help prevent individuals who are prohibited from having a gun for mental health reasons from obtaining a firearm. The Department of Justice, arguing that current federal law contains terminology about mental health issues that is too vague, proposed a regulation that would clarify who is ineligible to possess a firearm for specific situations related to mental health, like commitment to a mental institution. “In addition to providing general guidance on federal law, these clarifications will help states determine what information should be made accessible to the federal background check system, which will, in turn, strengthen the system's reliability and effectiveness,” the administration said in a fact sheet distributed to reporters. The second executive action, proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services, would allow some medical organizations more leeway to report “limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands” to the federal background check system. “The proposed rule will not change the fact that seeking help for mental health problems or getting treatment does not make someone legally prohibited from having a firearm,” the White House added. The two new “executive actions” announced Friday by the Office of the Vice President add to over two dozen executive branch rules designed to help reduce gun violence. Legislative efforts to pass stricter background checks failed to gain traction in Congress last year. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So not a word about these pharmaceutical drugs? Which have been proven to trigger violent thoughts in people that take them? >:( Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 04, 2014, 02:38:40 am Brother, the drugs mental health patients are on is not the issue with this. That's secondary to the outright socialist anti-constitution actions by the Executive Branch.
The president is using executive power to put in place laws that are no laws. It's dictatorial to act like this outside of Congress and Senate. But where is the Congress and Senate? Standing by letting it happen, along party lines of course. There was a time when a US president wold be impeached for acting like this. Instead, these days they get a second term. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 09, 2014, 07:19:50 am See a shrink, lose your gun
New 'rules' would suspend 2nd Amendment even for 'outpatient' treatment In an end-of-week “information dump” often resorted to by political leaders to publicly release information they would like overlooked, President Obama formally has launched his much-feared expansion of the use of mental health diagnoses to crack down on gun ownership. The Obama Department of Homeland Security already is on record casting aspersions on the mental ability of returning veterans, third-party candidate supporters and people with pro-life bumper stickers – calling them potential “right-wing extremists.” It was also caught, through the IRS, targeting conservative organizations that might be critical of Obama. So critics of the administration long have warned the move would come. On Friday, it did. Obama announced that his Department of Justice is proposing a rule change that would “clarify” that being committed to a mental institution – a key red flag under gun ownership rules – would include receiving nebulous “outpatient” services from a professional, such as a psychiatrist. The president said his Health and Human Services agency is issuing a rule to pierce the privacy protections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act so there would be “express permission” for “entities” to hand over to the federal government certain medical records – that is, “information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands.” WND reported six months ago on alarms raised by various groups over this issue. At the time, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC, warned that the administration was widening the door for those subject to a “mental” deficiency definition, looking for ways to send people to a mental institution for “mental defectiveness or mental illness” or “for other reasons.” “The phrase ‘for other reasons’ is overly broad and vague,” EPIC said. “Although the DOJ has illustrated that drug use is an example of ‘commitments for other reasons,’ the nebulous language would grant the DOJ sweeping authority to prohibit individuals from possessing firearms, a constitutionally protected right.” The privacy advocates warned: “Until the DOJ clearly defines and enumerates the types of formal commitments that can bar gun ownership, HHS should not amend its regulations to release sensitive mental health information to the DOJ.” The Obama administration’s gun-control agenda accelerated after the Sandy Hook school shooting in December 2012. It then began to press for “closing background check loopholes to keep guns out of dangerous hands,” a ban on “military-style” weapons and some ammunition magazines, as well as “making schools safer” and improving mental health services. See the real details about the Second Amendment in the Whistleblower issue on “Firearms and Freedom: Why the Second Amendment is more important than ever.” But the vague generalities used to describe the plans have worried privacy advocates and Second Amendment supporters. ‘Wrong hands’ On Friday, Obama announced his executive actions to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” “Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence,” his statement said. “While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide.” That, he wrote, explains the need for the DOJ rule “to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm” and the HHS rule change is “to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information … to the federal background check system.” His statement noted that Obama already has directed federal agencies to hand over criminal records and other “information” about those who are prohibited from having guns “for mental health reasons.” And he spent $20 million to “improve incentives for states” to hand over background check information to the federal government. He’s proposing to spend $50 million on that in 2014. At the Washington Times, commentator Michael E. Hammond said, “The real agenda of the gun-hating Obama administration is to strip gun rights from law-abiding Americans, even if the result is to discourage people from seeking counseling.” He asked: “Do you really think a hunter or gun owner feels somehow less violated when, as a result of sharing his deepest secrets in confidence, his name is turned over to government as either a dangerous or incompetent person and – as has happened – a SWAT team is sent to his house to seize his guns?” It was just a year ago that Obama announced 23 executive actions aimed at curbing gun rights. Then Congress handed him a massive defeat, refusing to go along with some of the more reaching plans to curb gun ownership. The federal government admits it already has banned from gun ownership those who have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution, have been found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity, or otherwise have been determined through an adjudication process to have a severe mental condition. Judicial records The mental health records come from the judiciary, not the health system. Now the federal government wants access to all such records from health care providers, too. The Electronic Privacy Information Center said the best way to handle the federal government’s plans would be to leave in place the protections provided for consumers under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s Privacy Rule, which doesn’t allow such discussions of diagnoses or treatment. EPIC said at the time if changes are made, there need to be clear protections. “HHS should assign liability to states that disclose excess mental health data for NICS purposes,” the comments said. “HHS should mandate states notify NICS as soon as possible but no [later] than 10 business days of an incorrect or outdated mental illness record.” Said EPIC: “There are not enough adequate privacy protections in place, under state law or otherwise, for data collected by state entities for reporting to the NICS. … Many states do not have privacy laws that explicitly address privacy protection of mental health records and availability to the NICS.” WND also has reported on another anti-gun strategy, which is a possible explanation for why the Obama administration has failed to launch legal action against Colorado and Washington, where voters have voted to legalize marijuana under their state laws, even though federal law doesn’t allow it. Some have asked if there something about the idea of legalizing marijuana that Washington likes. The idea may have been borne out recently when the Congressional Research Service released its report on the “State Legalization of Recreational Marijuana: Selected Legal Issues.” As attorneys Todd Garvey and Brian Yeh wrote in the report, Washington has flexibility regarding drug prosecution, stating: “The extent to which federal authorities will actually seek to prosecute individuals who are engaged in marijuana-related activities in Colorado and Washington remains uncertain. President Obama himself has suggested the prosecuting simple possession is not a priority, while the Department of Justice has said only that ‘growing, selling or possession any amount of marijuana remains illegal under federal law.’” What is more certain, they wrote, is that federal firearms regulators will be aggressive about banning anyone who uses marijuana from buying – or possessing – a weapon. “With the legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes in Colorado and Washington, it seems likely the ATF will … consider a recreational user of marijuana to be a prohibited possessor of firearms regardless of whether the use is lawful under state provisions,” they wrote. The attorneys said the ATF specifically has stated “any person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance, and is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition.” They further wrote, “These individuals are to answer ‘yes’ when asked on the firearms transfer form if they are unlawful users of a controlled substance.” Targeting veterans Also, the government has been using its interaction with veterans to designate many of them – by the tens of thousands – incapable of handling their own financial affairs and, therefore, banned from having guns. A lawsuit was just filed by the United States Justice Foundation against the Veterans Administration for snatching veterans’ gun rights without “due process” or any “factual or legal basis.” WND has published reports about how returning veterans were being deprived of their Second Amendment rights without a court-based adjudication competency process, based on arbitrary VA agency decisions. The problem arises when the agency wants to appoint a fiduciary – someone to advise a disabled veteran or one receiving certain government benefits – to help with the management of the benefits. The government then routinely notifies the FBI’s NICS system, a federally maintained list of those whose competency has been challenged. That means they no longer can purchase a gun or even keep the one they may have. Michael Connelly, executive director of the USJF, told WND the initial lawsuit is to compel the VA to respond to two requests under the Freedom of Information Act. “The information requested included Veterans Benefits Administration rules, regulations and criteria for making ‘determinations of incompetency due to a physical or mental condition of a benefit recipient,’” the legal team explained. “The USJF has received numerous complaints from military veterans around the country who are being declared incompetent to handle their own financial affairs and then told that they can no longer purchase or own firearms or ammunition,” said Connelly. “This determination is being made without due process protections for the veterans and the basis for the incompetency ruling is often arbitrary and without a factual or legal basis.” Just a month ago, WND columnist Jeff Knox warning about Obama’s newly announced strategy. A front “The strategy is to use the wide acceptance of the idea that the mentally ill should not have access to firearms as a front for prohibiting a broad array of ‘normal’ people from possessing guns or ammunition. As with most things, the devil is in the details. What is mental illness? Who is mentally ill? How mentally ill must one be to warrant revocation of a fundamental human right? Who makes that determination? Who is ‘normal,’ and how ‘normal’ do they have to be to own guns? We all know people who have dealt with some mental health issues or who people consider a bit odd, but who are also fully functional, completely rational, good people who would never harm anyone. The new anti-rights strategy is to cast doubts on those people and deny them their rights to own guns and ammunition.” Knox also reported his sources confirm the strategy of using “emergency” legislation to “pass draconian bills with no hearings, no committee votes and no public input” that would further “control” firearms. “While this anti-rights sneak attack is just getting under way, you can be sure it is well-planned and well-funded, so expect to see a flood of bills dealing with mental health in general and firearms access by the mentally ill in particular introduced in Congress and state legislatures nationwide in the coming months,” Knox wrote. “These bills will be promoted as ‘common sense,’ but they will contain definitions so broad that hundreds of thousands – possibly millions – of regular folks who have been or are being successfully treated for common, minor, mental and emotional issues will be denied their right to arms as ‘mental defectives.’ People suffering from mild depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, even women treated for PMS, could be lumped in with violent schizophrenics and the criminally insane.” And be banned from having a firearm. Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/01/see-a-shrink-lose-your-gun/#ezsGvKQe088Hv1HU.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 09, 2014, 12:25:06 pm Quote On Friday, Obama announced his executive actions to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” “Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence,” his statement said. “While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide.” Rick Warren was on Piers Morgan last month pushing just that - saying how we need to keep guns out of the mentally ill(and he exploited his son yet again, who committed suicide last year, when making this rationalization). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zel_wDnAA5k Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 09, 2014, 02:31:10 pm Quote The attorneys said the ATF specifically has stated “any person who uses or is addicted to ****, regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing **** use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance, and is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition.” They further wrote, “These individuals are to answer ‘yes’ when asked on the firearms transfer form if they are unlawful users of a controlled substance.” And that is the caveat. It's why the federal government is trying so hard to get states to change their gun laws to be in line with the feds. The federal government has only been able to breach gun stores via the required "FFL", Federal Firearms License. You sell guns in a retail store, the customer is required to fill out all those federal forms, one of which is like they say, your asked about drugs, which if your a licensed state medical cannabis user, then you must tell the truth on that form, otherwise it's filing a false federal form, and that can be treated by the feds as a federal crime, and likely would be. And it's why the federal government has such a beef with Arizona. Those forms are only required by gun stores in a retail setting, regardless of state gun laws. So, here in Arizona, the simple solution is to buy and sell privately, within the state, either person to person or at gun shows, which technically is a bunch of private owners gathered in one location. State lines involve requiring a FFL to send or receive a gun across state lines. If you order a gun online, it must be sent to somebody that has a FFL, then you go pick it up and verify your identity. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 17, 2014, 06:51:59 am Fed drops Bombshell to sick Army Vet.Turn in your Guns or go to jail:Army VET looses right to bear arms
Pat Kirby has his guns taken away by the federal government, then everyone else is probably going to eventually face the same thing. The clock is ticking. Pat Kirby is a decorated Oregon Vietnam Veteran with PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). He never imagined he would receive a letter telling him he will have to turn over his guns, or face imprisonment. He is the ultimate expression of a law abiding American citizen. He served his country, worked hard to raise a family, and created a nice life in spite of his PTSD. But his comfort zone was jerked away when he was told he had to give up one of his most basic rights for the most unbelievable reasons. His crime? There was no no crime. The Veterans Administration has deemed Mr. Kirby “incompetent” because his wife takes care of their finances. He has a good credit rating, he pays his taxes, he has never been arrested in his life, yet the federal government says will have to surrender his firearms and give up his Second Amendment right due to the VA’s designation of “incompetent”. His alleged incompetence is based on his own admission that he does not take care of his own finances. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xKlqPnD39kM http://countdowntozerotime.com/2014/01/17/fed-drops-bombshell-to-sick-army-vet-turn-in-your-guns-or-go-to-jailarmy-vet-looses-right-to-bear-arms/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2014, 11:57:01 am Mark, is there a link for this article?
It's a good article, BTW. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 17, 2014, 12:18:09 pm Mark, is there a link for this article? It's a good article, BTW. YEP Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2014, 12:20:18 pm Thanks! :)
They seem to be doing gun confiscation now VERY craftily - pretty much doing so where it's not being reported in the MSM much, that is. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 17, 2014, 01:57:21 pm Quote He is the ultimate expression of a law abiding American citizen. No, more like the typical apathetic, deluded American that allowed their government to pass these laws that the VA is just enforcing. Now, sitting back and enjoying their "freedom" in America while they let politicians run things is coming back to bite them. It's not like this is news. There's been a big debate over this for some time in how the new rule requires the person to prove they are not mentally unstable once the government deems them so. The government standards used to make that determination is also questionable. But the real problem is it's the government making the determination, not private medical experts. It's all about what the government personnel say, as I don't think independent private medical opinions are considered in the evaluation process. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 22, 2014, 05:19:01 am Oklahoma state rep sponsors bill to end 'zero-tolerance' punishment
A proposed Oklahoma state law would end the "zero tolerance" school policies that have punished students for shaping a Pop Tart into a gun and other similar acts. Rep. Sally Kern, a Republican, is sponsoring the Common Sense Zero Tolerance Act. She says her bill is in response to the inflexible and dangerous discipline policies that not only emotionally harm children but risk their futures as well. "My bill has nothing to do with the importance of keeping children safe. I am totally for that it our schools," she says. "This just says, Let's stop criminalizing the behavior of children when they're doing what they do naturally, and that's play." According to the legislation, schools would no longer be bound by the zero-tolerance requirement, giving them more flexibility. Kern says schools would be given "the discretion to deal with each incident in a common-sense way," which would also mean ignoring an incident recognized as children playing. Similar legislation is also being proposed in the Maryland and Texas legislatures. - See more at: http://www.onenewsnow.com/education/2014/01/22/oklahoma-state-rep-sponsors-bill-to-end-zero-tolerance-punishment#.Ut-oIbROm70 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 22, 2014, 02:50:06 pm It's about time. One would hope that some common sense would be applied by grown adults tasked with educating children. You shouldn't punish the kids in many cases, rather they should be educated about the issue, taught what's right, and how what they did was not good.
But expel a child because they point their finger at another student like a gun? Or because they made a clay sculpture of a gun? That kind of reaction is absurd, and I suspect has been pushed by the anti-gun lobby. You can't have a blanket reaction to every situation, as each situation is unique. That's not common sense, but fact. Title: Shooting at NC church leaves boy critically wounded Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2014, 04:42:10 pm Posting this in this thread b/c I wonder if this "church" made itself into a "gun free" zone.
Shooting at NC church leaves boy critically wounded http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/shooting-at-nc-church-leaves-boy-critically-wounded 1/28/14 The Rev. James Gailliard says he heard more than 15 gunshots and then held a boy shot in the head until authorities arrived. RALEIGH, N.C. — Police in a North Carolina town are searching for a man who sprayed a church playground with gunfire, striking four youths and leaving a 12-year-old boy gravely wounded. The Rev. James Gailliard at Word Tabernacle Church in Rocky Mount said the shooting happened shortly before 6 p.m. Monday, as about two dozen neighborhood teens played basketball on courts behind the sanctuary. Gailliard was in his office when he heard more than 15 gunshots and ran outside. Among those hit was 12-year-old Nyreek Horne, who the preacher said was shot through the head. He cradled the bleeding boy until help arrived. "In our community, we do hear gunshots from time to time. But what was different this time was that it was so close and it was so many," Gailliard said. "I held him in my arms until the paramedics got there. He was shot in the eye and the bullet went out the back of his brain. He was struggling to breathe, but he was fighting." Police said Tuesday that Horne remained in critical condition. Three other young males shot — ages 13, 17 and 19 — were all treated and released. Witnesses could provide only a vague description of the shooter, who ran away and was seen getting into a small, light-colored SUV. Rocky Mount police are asking members of public to come forward with any information that might help lead them to a suspect. It was the latest shooting in a small Southern city dealing with violent crime on a scale typical in more urban areas. The shooting at the church happened days after a funeral for 15-year-old Brian Freeman, who was walking home with a friend when a car pulled up and someone started firing. A city of nearly 60,000 located about 50 miles east of Raleigh, Rocky Mount sits along Interstate 95 — a primary north-south corridor for moving drugs and illegal guns between major East Coast cities. In 2012, the most recent year for which FBI crime statistics are available, the murder rate in Rocky Mount was more than twice that of New York City. The Rocky Mount police force has a sizable gang awareness and prevention program. The city council has instituted anti-graffiti measures and a local "Youth Protection Ordinance" that includes a nightly curfew barring those under 15 from gathering in public without adult supervision. "We're experiencing many of the problems many other communities are experiencing with gang violence, and we are addressing that," said Cpl. Michael Lewis, a police spokesman. "There's age groups from middle school on up through high school involved in this type of activity." Lewis said it is too early in the investigation to know whether the latest shooting involved a gang-related dispute, but Gailliard said there is a widespread suspicion in the community that Monday's mass shooting was in retaliation for the recent drive-by killing. Those involved are from different neighborhoods engaged in competition for turf, the preacher said. Gailliard moved south from Philadelphia nine years ago to found the church. Part of his congregation's ministry involves reaching out to young people who live near the church. Gailliard said he had never seen Horne before he was shot, but he has since met the boy's family at the hospital. He organized a vigil on Tuesday to pray for the boy's recovery and an end to the violence. He said people there are often distrustful of the police, but he was encouraging people to tell the detectives what they know. "Unfortunately, in my time have I have funeralized a lot of young African-American males who died in violent situations," the preacher said. "We put the basketball goals up and took the fence down specifically so the community could just walk on the premises and have a safe place to play. That trust has been violated." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on January 29, 2014, 01:50:41 am Quote Part of his congregation's ministry involves reaching out to young people who live near the church...Unfortunately, in my time have I have funeralized a lot of young African-American males who died in violent situations," the preacher said.... Apparently, these kids are black and the church was doing an outreach to keep kids off the street, so this sounds like possibly a gang shooting. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 29, 2014, 10:06:44 am Saw Obama's SOTU speech last night - when he talked about reducing "gun violence", he mentioned all of the civic institutions, leaders, etc that are helping et al. One of them he mentioned was "faith leaders".
Looks like Caesar is slowly calling in his chips now. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 06, 2014, 04:07:25 pm http://news.yahoo.com/constitution-check-does-mean-bear-guns-110205014.html
Constitution Check: What does it mean that there is a right to “bear” guns? 2/6/14 Lyle Denniston looks at two Second Amendment cases under consideration at the Supreme Court later this month that would clarify questions posed by the National Rifle Association. THE STATEMENT AT ISSUE: There is “a growing line of court of appeals decisions that, while stopping short of holding that there is no Second Amendment right outside the home, consistently reach the same result by deeming any right to bear arms in public to be, at best, outside the Second Amendment’s ‘core’ and then balancing it away under an anemic form of intermediate scrutiny.” – Charles J. Cooper, a Washington, D.C., attorney for the National Rifle Association, in a brief filed at the Supreme Court on Monday, urging the Justices to strike down a law that bans minors from carrying a handgun in public, beyond the home. WE CHECKED THE CONSTITUTION, AND… The Second Amendment, at its core, spells out not one, but two, rights when it protects “the right of the people.” There is a right to “keep” a gun, there is a right, to “bear” a gun. There is an “and” between the two in the text, so that might well be taken as a significant indication that these are separate rights. The Supreme Court in 2008 made it clear that the right to “keep” a gun is a personal right, and that it means one has a right to keep a functioning firearm for self-defense within the home. But it has refused repeatedly since then to take on the question of whether that right exists also outside the home. If there is a separate right to “bear” a gun (and the Court, in fact, did say in 2008 that the two rights were separate), it has not said what that means. The National Rifle Association, and some of its members, are now pressing the Supreme Court to answer that question. They are doing so in two cases testing whether the federal government and the states can restrict the rights of minors to possess a gun outside the home. The Court is expected to take its first look at those cases later this month, to decide whether it will hear either or both of them. The federal government, once again, is urging the Court to bypass those cases, as it has done with perhaps a half-dozen others seeking clarification of the Second Amendment’s scope. In a case from Texas, the NRA’s lawyers have reduced to elementary constitutional logic the question of what a right to “bear” guns means: “The explicit guarantee of the right to ‘bear’ arms would mean nothing,” the NRA’s filing argued, “if it did not protect the right to ‘bear’ arms outside of the home, where the Amendment already guarantees that they may be ‘kept.’ The most fundamental canons of construction forbid any interpretation that would discard this language as meaningless surplus.” While the NRA and its lawyers are sharply critical of the lower federal courts for failing to explicitly extend the Second Amendment beyond the confines of one’s home, there have been a couple of breakthrough decisions doing just that. For example, the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in Chicago did so when it ruled unconstitutional an Illinois law banning the carrying of guns in public, at least when that was for the purpose of self-defense. That decision had seemed headed for the Supreme Court, but the state legislature chose to eliminate the ban and the appeal prospect vanished. The lower courts that have declined to enlarge the right have seemed to be convinced that it would be a bold step to do so, and some have suggested that it should be up to the Supreme Court to make the ultimate decision on that point. The Court might be expected to step in to resolve the issue, if it were convinced that there is actually a true split on it among lower courts. In the new NRA cases now awaiting the Justices’ attention, separate groups of judges on the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, rejected NRA challenges to the federal and state laws restricting minors’ access to guns. The case involving the Texas law is explicitly about a right to carry a handgun in public, at least for minors. In that state, they may own a handgun, but without a license to carry it in public – for which they are ineligible because of their age – they may have such a weapon only at home. One of the reasons why the Justices might find the NRA challenges more appealing cases to review is that, in both, the federal appeals court came very close to creating an entirely new category of individuals ineligible to “bear” arms, merely because of their age. In both of the decisions at issue, the appeals court said it was “likely” that they were not protected at all under the Second Amendment, or under the separate parts of the Constitution that guarantee all individuals equal legal rights. If the Justices do agree to return to the ongoing controversy over the reach of the Second Amendment, it is probably too late in the current term to add that to the docket. If granted review, it would very likely go over to the next term, starting in October. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 10, 2014, 11:21:31 am Mayor: Nationwide Gun Confiscation Is Goal of Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Poughkeepsie, N.Y. mayor says he left the group over confiscation plans A current New York mayor has publicly announced his decision to leave Mayors Against Illegal Guns because the gun control group demands an all-out “confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.” Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg co-founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns in 2006 to promote gun control. In an announcement published by his city’s newspaper, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. Mayor John C. Tkazyik said he quit the group after realizing it was simply a vehicle for Michael Bloomberg to “promote his personal gun-control agenda.” “It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns,” he stated. “Under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.” “I don’t believe, never have believed and never will believe that public safety is enhanced by encroaching on our right to bear arms and I will not be a part of any organization that does.” Tkazyik also pointed out that Chicago’s extremely high crime rates are undeterred by the city’s highly restrictive gun laws. “Depriving law-abiding citizens of their right to own firearms only makes them more vulnerable,” he added. Tkazyik’s announcement is a stark contrast to the rhetoric of other politicians who want to grossly violate human rights. At a gun control event earlier this year, Austin, Texas City Council Member Mike Martinez admitted that gun control is simply a step-by-step process to completely eliminate the Second Amendment. While pointing at a sign held by a protestor which read “Stop Gun Ban,” Martinez said that “someone needs to inform him that there is no gun ban currently, but because of the work we’re doing today, we will make [his] sign legitimate shortly.” “So you hang on to that [sign],” he said to a cheering crowd of gun control advocates. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a0LwGnaKZy8 And in a flashback to 1995, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) told 60 Minutes that she wanted to outright ban all firearms owned by Americans. “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them … ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in,’ I would have done it,” she said. This is the true intent of gun control, even though many of its advocates whitewash the truth with a variety of propaganda techniques or by just simply being ignorant. For example, the organizers for the event at which Martinez spoke told reporters that they didn’t want to ban guns even though that is exactly what Martinez demanded in his speech. Gun control advocates constantly parrot deceptive phrases such as “common sense solutions” and “we don’t want to ban guns” when selling their agenda which will only lead to the complete disarmament of the population by authoritarians. Fortunately, on the other hand, Mayor Tkazyik is joining an ever-increasing list of public officials who have denounced gun control. Last month, Detroit’s Police Chief James Craig told reporters that legal gun owners deter crime. “Coming from California, where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of Carrying Concealed Weapon [permits], and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation,” he said. “I changed my orientation real quick; Maine is one of the safest places in America.” “Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.” And last year, Erie Co., N.Y. Sheriff Timothy B. Howard publicly announced that his department would not enforce New York’s latest gun control law, the SAFE Act. “It’s an unenforceable law and I believe it will ultimately be declared unconstitutional,” he said to reporters. “Do you want law enforcement people that will say ‘I will do this because I’m told to do this, even if I know it’s wrong?’” It is refreshing to see elected officials serving their constituents while also respecting the Bill of Rights. http://www.infowars.com/mayor-nationwide-gun-confiscation-is-goal-of-mayors-against-illegal-guns/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 10, 2014, 11:32:56 am Quote This is the true intent of gun control, even though many of its advocates whitewash the truth with a variety of propaganda techniques or by just simply being ignorant. For example, the organizers for the event at which Martinez spoke told reporters that they didn’t want to ban guns even though that is exactly what Martinez demanded in his speech. Gun control advocates constantly parrot deceptive phrases such as “common sense solutions” and “we don’t want to ban guns” when selling their agenda which will only lead to the complete disarmament of the population by authoritarians. And Rick Warren was on Piers Morgan 2 months ago saying how "we need to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill"(and doing so making an example of his son who committed suicide recently, yet again). Yeah - these minions are VERY crafty in their rhetoric(even the bible warns about the craftiness of the enemy). Never mind the fact that gun-related suicides happen THE LEAST(and Warren's son was on a lot of Big Pharma drugs). Anyhow - yeah, the gun-control lobby has been very craftily deceptive in terms of using their words, largely to try to play on everyone's guilt and weak flesh. Even Bill Clinton would say things like, "My intent is to never take away everyone's guns". Even Franklin Graham supports universal background checks, but it's not like he comes out an boasts about it. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 10, 2014, 03:12:01 pm Manufacturers Change Look of AR-15; Rifle Is Now Legal in New York State
:D Pass a stupid law, get a stupid result. This, Clash Daily reports, is a remodeled AR-15, and it is legal in New York despite the state’s “assault weapons” ban: (http://c6.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Screen-Shot-2014-02-09-at-8.12.39-AM-630x380.png) When the opponents of “assault weapon” bans argue that it is preposterous for the state to ban firearms based on the way they look, they really mean it. It is. The rifle in the photograph above is no more or less powerful than the one that has been banned; it just looks different. And, because the SAFE Act was, typically, interested only in cosmetic questions, a simple change to its aesthetic rendered the rifle legal once more. As Clash Daily’s Jonathan S. explains: Prototypes for the newly designed AR-15 are hitting gun shops across New York, as gun shops and machinists have designed a rifle that complies with the anti-gun law. At least one gun shop has received a letter from state police saying that the new AR-15 style rifles should be legal in the state as long as they don’t have some of the features that the law prohibits. The new gun law bans all kinds of semi-automatic rifles that have been labeled with the “assault” term even though these are very common rifles and are no more powerful than the average hunting rifle. Features like adjustable stocks, pistols grips, and flash suppressors has been deemed to be unlawful on these rifles, mainly because it makes them LOOK mean. And we all know how little these anti-gun lawmakers really know about guns, as the “Ghost gun” video illustrated. The new AR-15 design did away with the pistol grip which gives the gun an odd paintball gun look. The stock is fixed as well, but at least New Yorkers now have a legal way to own an AR-15, a fact which is still driving some gun control activists mad. Reading this story, one would almost conclude that legislation that deals only with the superficial and the irrelevant is inherently silly. Curious. Fewer people are killed with all rifles each year (323 in 2011) than with shotguns (356), hammers and clubs (496), and hands and feet (728). http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/370733/manufacturers-change-look-ar-15-rifle-now-legal-new-york-state-charles-c-w-cooke Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 11, 2014, 05:41:45 am 50 of Bloomberg’s Mayors Quit After Gun Confiscation Plan Leaked
Nearly 50 mayors have jumped ship on former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” campaign over allegations that the group’s ultimate goal is outright gun confiscation, according to one former member. Former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun control group hits snag with truth-telling mayor. As reported, Poughkeepsie Mayor John Tkazyik published a statement in last week’s Poughkeepsie Journal coming clean about the group’s true intentions, total disarmament of law-abiding gun owners. “Under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens,” Tkazyik said, confirming what many already suspected about the group. “Nearly 50 pro-Second Amendment mayors have left the organization. They left for the same reason I did,” he also added. The fact that 50 mayors bailed in response to a concerted effort to undermine the Bill of Rights is certainly headline-worthy, but so far, unsurprisingly, few other media outlets have picked the story up. And Tkazyik isn’t the first to cast these allegations. In 2007, the mayor of Williamsport, Pa., also said she left after witnessing “dubious” attempts to subvert the Second Amendment. “I have learned that the coalition may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership, and that some actions on your behalf are dubious,” then-Williamsport Mayor Mary Wolf wrote in a letter to Bloomberg himself. And just last year, during a Mothers Demand Action rally (a gun control coalition which merged with MAIG in December 2013), Austin, Texas City Councilman Mike Martinez singled out a protestor carrying a “Stop the Gun Ban” sign and told him, “…there is no gun ban currently, but because of the work we’re doing here today, we will make your sign legitimate shortly, so you hang on to that.” News of the group’s traitorous crusade comes at a time when American gun owners are already wary of continual attempts to curtail firearm ownership. Since the Sandy Hook school shooting, the Obama administration has proposed legislation aimed at combating “gun violence,” including proposals that would require background checks for all gun sales; in effect, registration. American gun owners who know the history behind gun control are fearful that a federal gun registry will eventually lead to confiscation. Indeed, numerous articles have been published showing how, since 2007, roving law enforcement teams have been disarming Californians deemed “illegal” using a list of owners. However, in the face of blatant evidence, the director of MAIG, Mark Glaze, has boldly gone on to publicly deny that “nobody in California has come to take anyone’s guns.” REST: http://www.infowars.com/nearly-50-of-bloombergs-mayors-bail-over-gun-confiscation-agenda/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 11, 2014, 01:43:42 pm Quote “I have learned that the coalition may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership, and that some actions on your behalf are dubious,” then-Williamsport Mayor Mary Wolf wrote in a letter to Bloomberg himself. She was spot on! Nailed the globalist socialist behind all that stuff. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 13, 2014, 10:41:28 pm http://hotair.com/archives/2014/02/13/oops-thousands-of-connecticutans-are-now-criminals-in-possession-of-unregistered-assault-weapons/
2/13/14 Oops: Thousands of Connecticutans are now criminals in possession of unregistered “assault” weapons Well. That didn’t go according to plan, did it? Via the Hartford Courant: Quote Everyone knew there would be some gun owners flouting the law that legislators hurriedly passed last April, requiring residents to register all military-style rifles with state police by Dec. 31. … By the end of 2013, state police had received 47,916 applications for assault weapons certificates, Lt. Paul Vance said. An additional 2,100 that were incomplete could still come in. That 50,000 figure could be as little as 15 percent of the rifles classified as assault weapons owned by Connecticut residents, according to estimates by people in the industry, including the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000. Which means that there are probably at least tens of thousands of Connecticut residents who, as of January 1st, are currently guilty of committing a Class D felony for the newly-established crime of failing to register what the legislature has so astutely defined as their “assault” weapons. That includes AR-15s, a.k.a. the most popular rifle in America, and at least one Connecticut lawmaker is shocked — shocked! — that more people haven’t come forward. Quote “I honestly thought from my own standpoint that the vast majority would register,” said Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, the ranking GOP senator on the legislature’s public safety committee. “If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don’t follow them, then you have a real problem.” Hmm. Perhaps the problem was rushing through a bunch of knee-jerk, feel-good, and ultimately impotent laws that you’re not actually sure you want to dedicate the resources to even enforce. That’s a real problem. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 14, 2014, 03:30:09 am Quote “If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don’t follow them, then you have a real problem.” WHAT? People not following the orders of government? REALLY? The real problem is politicians passing laws the public doesn't respect because politicians aren't asking the public, they are passing laws and demanding the public comply, when the public is suppose to be telling it's representatives what to pass into law. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 14, 2014, 01:42:24 pm http://news.yahoo.com/shooting-spree-gun-law-concerns-la-town-093125313.html
After shooting spree, gun law concerns in La. town 2/13/14 HOUMA, La. (AP) — Denise Freeman was just starting to learn about the two sides to her new husband, Benjamin, before she was slain. There was the smiling Ben, dancing on a chair on his 38th birthday in October. Then there was the troubling Ben, handed a citation weeks later alleging domestic battery against his wife. The day after Christmas, authorities say, Benjamin Freeman drowned his wife Denise in a bathtub before embarking on a shooting spree that left his ex-wife's mother and the CEO of a hospital where he used to work dead. Three others were wounded. In a last violent act, he turned a shotgun on himself, taking his life. The rampage stunned Louisiana's bayou community of Houma, southwest of New Orleans, where the couple lived. In a nation recoiling from numerous shootings, the spree raised questions whether Louisiana law provides adequate safeguards for keeping guns out of the hands of troubled people — a concern that echoes across communities elsewhere in the U.S. "I want to know how he got a gun," said Denise's brother, Kainan Mcallister. He said his sister had confided to him and his wife, Jessica, that her husband was seeking help for a mental disorder after he received the domestic battery citation in November. "She told me that he was taking medication for bipolar disorder and that it was making him more aggressive and that they were switching the medication," Jessica Mcallister said. "She wanted to help him. She was trying to get him help." Health professionals and investigators haven't disclosed any mental health details about Ben Freeman or whether a bipolar disorder was involved. In photographs posted online, the couple appeared to be openly affectionate and loving. The Mcallisters described Ben and Denise's relationship as a whirlwind romance. Both nurses, they met before but hadn't become romantically involved until recently. They dated and married in about a year's time and were often seen hugging and holding hands. But the Mcallisters say it was no secret Ben Freeman was having problems. The 38-year-old father of four from a previous marriage was embroiled in a custody dispute with his ex-wife. Dr. Michael Blue, an assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Tulane University School of Medicine, doesn't know the particulars of Freeman's mental health. But he said those with bipolar disorder, when not managed well, can experience inflated feelings of aggression, irritability, euphoria or depression. In extreme cases, patients can lose touch with reality or become delusional, he added. No matter what was troubling Ben Freeman, critics note it wasn't hard for him to get a gun — or keep it. Nationwide, patient confidentiality rights and privileges make it nearly impossible for mental health care providers to share patient information, even if they suspect someone is potentially dangerous, Blue said. "There isn't really a law that protects me or any mental health professional," he said. "It's really only when they threaten a particular individual, then ... confidentiality can be broken, and then I have the duty to protect and warn the potential victim as well as the authorities." Blue said involuntary inpatient hospitalization is an option for those who are gravely disabled or an imminent threat to themselves or others. But imminent threat isn't always so clear. "Any person who is psychotic or manic could potentially be dangerous In the Freeman case, there has so far been no proof of premeditation, said Brennan Matherne, spokesman for the Lafourche Parish Sheriff's Office, the lead investigating agency since the shootings occurred there. Asked if investigators were probing reports of a possible bipolar disorder in Ben Freeman, Matherne told The Associated Press in an email he had no information pending a toxicology report on Freeman still incomplete. There was another nagging question raised by the killings: Agents who visited the Freeman home on Nov. 27 to answer a call about suspected domestic violence against the wife didn't know there was a protective order — previously requested by Freeman's ex-wife in another jurisdiction — still in force. That order specified that Freeman could not possess a gun and covered the dates May 1 through Nov. 30, 2013. Even had they known of the order and the gun restriction, existing law notes officers need consent or probable cause to search for a weapon. Still, the knowledge could have influenced the line of questioning or approach at the scene, Matherne said. Pete Adams, executive director of the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, said the state is working to close the information loophole. Currently, court records about violent offenders and firearm restrictions are not automatically sent to the federal database known as NICS, where local law enforcement officers could get a heads-up when responding to an incident, Adams said. "The ability to do it is being implemented and built, but it's very complicated," Adams said. NICS — the National Instant Check System — provides background records to determine whether a person has been disqualified for various reasons from buying a gun. He said Louisiana has a disconnect in communication among courthouses, local law enforcement agencies and NICS — each with different electronic record systems. Jon Griffin, a policy specialist with the Denver-based National Conference of State Legislatures, said that's an issue in several states. "In the wake of recent mass shootings across the country, legislators have examined ways to alter their firearms laws in ways that best serve their communities. One way they have done so is by requiring state agencies to report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System when an individual is found mentally ill," Griffin said via email. Last month, the Obama administration announced a pair of executive actions intended to strengthen federal background checks for gun purchasers, particularly to limit firearms access for those with mental health issues. Several perpetrators of the nation's worst mass shootings have had such issues, including in the Newtown, Conn., school killings. One proposed rule change aims to clarify terminology used by federal law to prohibit people from buying a firearm for mental health reasons — after complaints ambiguous wording made it hard to determine who should be blocked from purchases. In January 2013, Ben Freeman bought a 12-gauge shotgun at a chain store. But no red flags arose during background checks. It was months before his ex-wife filed the protection order against him in Lafourche Parish. Parishes, like counties elsewhere, are separate jurisdictions. When officers were called to Denise Freeman's Houma home in November, it fell to Terrebonne Parish agents to respond. And the crimes on Dec. 26 spanned two parishes as Freeman first killed his wife in Terrebonne Parish where Houma is located before entering Lafourche Parish nearby, authorities say. After killing Denise, investigators say, Freeman went to the home of his ex-wife's parents, where he shot and killed his former mother-in-law and wounded his onetime father-in-law and former sister-in-law. Freeman then headed to the home of a longtime CEO for a hospital where Ben Freeman had worked as a nurse for years until 2011. Investigators say he shot and killed the executive and wounded the wife. Hospital officials say Freeman had resigned, citing undisclosed personal reasons. Lafource Parish Sheriff Craig Webre said police previously had been called to the hospital after Freeman damaged a room and that Freeman told officers he would seek mental help. Today, relatives and survivors struggle to heal as police seek a motive. The Mcallisters said Freeman's relationship with Denise appeared to be improving in December. Denise Freeman was moving to drop the battery charges, the Mcallisters said, and she and her two children joined Ben at a family holiday party at the McAllister home. But right after Christmas, Ben Freeman snapped, they said. Said Jessica Mcallister: "He ended up doing something that you can't take back." **And it was the gun that made him snap, eh? ::) Kainan Mcallister said his sister, a nurse for more than 20 years and a nurturer at heart, leaves a big void. "She was just good at taking care of other people," he said, choking with emotion. "She just wanted to be a mom for everybody." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 24, 2014, 11:53:55 am There are 6 RCs on the USSC - the RCC supports gun control.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/court-passes-challenges-restricting-handguns-young-adults-n37196 Court Passes On Challenges Restricting Handguns to Young Adults By Pete Williams The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to consider whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms applies outside the home, taking a pass on a hot topic that has divided the lower courts. The court declined to grant review of two laws that restrict handgun ownership by young adults — a federal law barring the sale of handguns to customers under 21 and a Texas law forbidding anyone under 21 to carry a handgun in public. Both laws were upheld by the lower courts. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to possess a gun at home for self-defense. Since then, the lower courts have split over the nature of gun rights beyond the home. The cases the court acted on Monday involved challenges brought by the National Rifle Association and a group of Texas residents under 21. The federal statute allows the sale of rifles and shotguns to anyone aged 18 or older but sets the minimum age for buying a handgun at 21. The Texas provision excludes anyone aged 18, 19, or 20 from a state law allowing adults to carry a handgun in public for self-defense. The state of Texas, arguing against the challenge, noted that three-quarters of the states have laws requiring a person to be at least 21 to get a license to carry a gun. The state's attorney general, Greg Abbott, was in the uncomfortable position of defending the law, putting him on the opposite side of the National Rifle Association in the case at a time when he is running for governor. The Obama administration defended the federal law restricting handgun sales to minors. Congress acted after finding that young offenders were especially prone to misusing firearms, the government says. The federal law was meant to prevent minors from crossing state lines to buy guns that they could not get legally in the own states, it says. First published February 24th 2014, 6:58 am Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on February 28, 2014, 06:41:33 am Conn. officer says woman sounds ‘anti-American’ for questioning gun control law
In a video posted Thursday to YouTube, Connecticut State Police Spokesman Lt. Paul Vance is heard telling a woman identified as “GMN Producer Guerilla Girl Ashley” that she sounded anti-American for questioning the state’s new gun control law. Ashley said she called regarding a letter her husband received saying he must either sell, turn in or destroy his firearm, which was deemed to be an “assault weapon” by a new law passed in the state. Lt. Vance explained the letter spelled out the options her husband now has regarding the law. After about five minutes of give and take with Ashley regarding the law, Lt. Vance is heard saying Ashley sounds anti-American. “I want to know, if it comes down to it, will the police go to my home if my husband refuses to give up a weapon that was formerly legal and now has been made illegal by a corrupt legislature?” she asked. “Will the police actually go to my home and threaten my family, ’cause I’m scared to death?” “We don’t threaten people, ma’am,” Lt. Vance said. “That doesn’t happen.” “If you’re going with the force of government, that’s a threat,” she responded. “Ma’am, it sounds like you’re anti-American, it sounds like you’re anti-law. I can’t answer your question,” Lt. Vance remarked. Ashley told Lt. Vance in no uncertain terms she is pro-American and took exception to being called anti-American, a charge Lt. Vance tried to walk back. Read Full Article http://www.examiner.com/article/conn-officer-says-woman-sounds-anti-american-for-questioning-gun-control-law Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Kilika on February 28, 2014, 12:30:32 pm Quote “We don’t threaten people, ma’am,” Lt. Vance said. “That doesn’t happen.” At least not by "decent cops". The thugs on police forces throttle citizens all the time. The decent ones don't threaten, they just kick your front door in with a SWAT team, taser and arrest you, then let the judge sort it out. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 03, 2014, 06:10:40 pm Bypassing Congress, DOJ to Announce Expansion to Gun Background Checks
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/02/Bypassing-Congress-DOJ-To-Announce-Expansion-To-Background-Checks 3/2/14 The Department of Justice (DOJ) is preparing to announce an expansion of background checks based on executive orders president Obama issued in January 2013. According to The Hill, the expansion consists of "three changes to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)." Two of the changes "will grant tribal access to NICS and authorize law enforcement agencies to use the system to run full background system checks before returning guns that have been seized or confiscated during the course of investigations." The third change "involves consolidated, electronic storage of information on gun purchases that have been denied via the NICS system." Obama's January 2013 executive orders were issued in response to Adam Lanza's heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 07, 2014, 05:30:34 pm Facebook to Place Guns in Same Category as ****
http://www.infowars.com/facebook-to-place-guns-in-same-category-as-****/ Bloomberg group to push gun control through Facebook, which is now restricting pro-gun free speech Kit Daniels Infowars.com March 5, 2014 Through sweeping policy changes, Facebook is now treating gun-related content as pornography on its social media site, including restrictions on users under 18 from seeing firearm-related content and the forced indoctrination of gun control propaganda targeted at users interested in firearms. Facebook’s new policies, which apply to both its namesake site and its photo-sharing subsidiary Instagram, were announced today in conjunction with the gun control group Moms Demand Action, which spent the past month pressuring Facebook to restrict free speech on firearm-related topics. Additionally, in a huge push to brainwash the public, Facebook will also provide free ad space to Moms Demand Action and Mayors Against Illegal Guns for gun control propaganda targeted at gun owners and other users interested in gun-related content. The new policies include, but are not limited to, the following: - Users under 18 will be banned from viewing Facebook pages where guns are advertised, which will likely include brick-and-mortar gun shops - Moderators of gun-related pages will be forced to announce gun laws at the top of their page - Users will be forced to “acknowledge” gun laws when prompted, even if the laws do not apply to them - Facebook will delete posts that indicate a seller is willing to sell across state lines, which likely also includes legal FTF transfers between gun shops, meaning that a gun store won’t be able to announce that it is willing to legally ship a firearm to an out-of-state buyer - Facebook will recommend that gun owners undergo background checks when purchasing firearms even if they are not legally required to do so Moms Demand Action pushed for the new policies under the guise of preventing “illegal gun sales” despite the fact that Facebook does not actually sell firearms or provide payment transfers between third-parties. “You cannot sell firearms on Facebook and Instagram,” Bob Owens, the editor of Bearing Arms, wrote. “There are no shopping carts and no e-commerce applications on either site for the sale of any item, of any kind.” Owens also pointed out that both Moms Demand Action and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which are spearheaded by the anti-gun former mayor Michael Bloomberg, object to gun owners talking about firearms on social media sites. “Some of those discussions do involved conversations on buying, selling, or trading firearms, [and] some of these conversations are used to set up physical meetings, in which actual transfers can take place, offline,” he added. “But what these prohibitionist cults desire is nothing more than the censorship of free speech.” Not only that, but these two groups are also working with Facebook to brainwash the public into accepting gun control. Title: Justice Kennedy denies request to block gun magazine law Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2014, 05:43:35 pm Justice Kennedy denies request to block gun magazine law
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/12/justice-kennedy-denies-request-to-block-gun-magazine-law/ 3/12/14 WASHINGTON – Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has denied an emergency request by the National Rifle Association to block enforcement of a California city ordinance that bans gun magazines capable of holding more than 10 bullets. A court spokesman says Kennedy denied the request without comment. The ban in Sunnyvale went into effect last week after 66 percent of voters approved it in November. The NRA challenged the law, but a federal judge ruled that it does not violate the Second Amendment right to own guns for self-defense. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco denied the NRA's request for an emergency order to stop the ban from taking effect while it considers the appeal. Kennedy overseas emergency appeals from California and other Western states. Title: High court bolsters domestic violence gun ban law Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 26, 2014, 02:37:39 pm High court bolsters domestic violence gun ban law
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_GUNS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT 3/26/14 WASHINGTON (AP) -- People convicted of minor domestic violence offenses can be barred from possessing guns even in states where no proof of physical violence is required to support the domestic violence charge, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. The ruling was a victory for the Obama administration, gun control groups and advocates for victims of domestic abusers who say the gun ban is critical in preventing the escalation of domestic violence. The justices unanimously rejected the argument put forth by gun rights groups and a Tennessee man who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor domestic assault against the mother of his child in 2001. The man, James Castleman, was then charged in 2009 with illegal possession of a firearm after he and his wife were accused of buying guns and selling them on the black market. Federal law bars a person convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence involving the use of physical force or a deadly weapon from possessing a firearm. But Castleman said he should not have to face the gun charges because the Tennessee law doesn't specify that his domestic violence crime had to include physical force. A federal judge agreed with Castleman and dismissed the charges because, he said, the victim could theoretically have been poisoned or tricked into injuring herself, which wouldn't technically count as physical force. The dismissal was upheld, on different grounds, by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. The Supreme Court reversed the appeals court and reinstated the charges against Castleman, in an opinion by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Writing for the court, Sotomayor said it was enough that Castleman pleaded guilty to having "intentionally or knowingly caused bodily injury to" the mother of his child. "Because Castleman's indictment makes clear that physical force was an element of his conviction, that conviction qualifies as a `misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,'" Sotomayor said. The Obama administration had argued that the lower court decisions would effectively nullify the gun ban in dozens of states where misdemeanor domestic violence laws don't specify the degree of force needed for conviction. That would frustrate the intent of Congress, the administration argued, which was to keep firearms away from anyone found guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence. Mayors Against Illegal Guns, founded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, praised Wednesday's ruling. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 04, 2014, 12:16:25 pm http://news.yahoo.com/why-does-john-boehner-want-keep-40-million-193629143.html
Why Does John Boehner Want to Keep 40 Million Americans From Buying Guns? 4/3/14 Reacting to the shooting at Fort Hood on Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner reiterated a popular NRA talking point: "There’s no question that those with mental health issues should be prevented from owning weapons or being able to purchase weapons." Those suffering the same diagnosed illnesses as the shooter — depression and anxiety — might be surprised by Boehner's willingness to take away their Second Amendment rights. Ivan Lopez, the alleged shooter, was being evaluated for post-traumatic stress disorder at the base, where he was stationed and lived with his wife. According to CNN, Lopez "was undergoing a variety of treatments for conditions including depression, anxiety and sleep disturbances," according to Army Secretary John McHugh. Lopez "was prescribed drugs that included Ambien" and "was fully examined last month by a psychiatrist." An estimated one-in-10 Americans suffers from depression, according to the Centers for Disease Control. That's about 31 million people, skewed told older people and women. The National Institutes of Health puts those suffering from "major depressive disorder" at the lower figure of 14.8 million. As for anxiety? The NIH says that 40 million Americans suffer from that. Even if Lopez had been diagnosed with PTSD, that's still sweeping up 7.7 million Americans — 2.5 percent of the country. Who John Boehner, it seems, doesn't think should be allowed to have a gun. That's almost certainly not actually what he believes. His comments, as The Hill's Russell Berman reports, came in the middle of an event at the Capitol. After saying there was "no question" that people with mental illness shouldn't be allowed to buy or own guns, he went on: "we need to continue to look at to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them." In the wake of the Newtown massacre, the NRA reiterated its call for one of the few gun control measures it supports: a database of the "actively" mentally ill, which gun sellers could use to screen buyers. Such databases exist, but usually with standards that are far, far more rigorous than anything Lopez was close to manifesting. Current federal law prohibits those who've been committed to an institution or officially determined to be "mentally defective" from buying a gun. That wasn't Lopez. This is the problem with using mental health as the screen for gun ownership: for many of those who commit acts of random violence, those acts are the first manifestations of more serious mental health issues. And, furthermore, as the millions of depressed and anxious Americans can attest, only a tiny, tiny percentage of those with mental illness — mild or strong — would ever commit such acts. But if Boehner is willing, at last, to support dramatic gun control efforts, there are almost certainly people on the other side of the aisle who'd be happy to work with him. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again, where's all the concerns by these people over these mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs? Or how about these forced vaccinations? Or how about those processed foods with Aspertame, MSG, etc in them? Why don't these people realize that these "mental illnesses" didn't even exist until the 70's or so? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 09, 2014, 12:02:42 pm So much for gun control...
http://www.wtae.com/news/stabbing-at-franklin-regional-high-school-in-murrysville/25391318?hpt=hp_t2 Students stabbed at Franklin Regional High School in Murrysville 20 people taken to hospitals; 1 student in police custody 4/9/14 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 14, 2014, 12:28:04 pm http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/04/09/Obama-Requests-1-1-Billion-DOJ-382-1-Million-For-Gun-Control
4/9/14 Obama Requests $1.1 Billion, DOJ $382.1 Million for Gun Control President Obama has requested $1.1 billion and the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked for $382.1 million for gun control "to protect Americans from gun violence." Included in the DOJ's $382.1 million figure is a request for $2 million for smart gun technology grants. According to The Washington Beacon, Obama's $1.1 billion "[includes] $182 million to support the president's 'Now is the Time' gun safety initiative." "Now is the Time" includes the following: 1. Require background checks for all gun sales. 2. Strengthen the background check system for gun sales. 3. Pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons. 4. Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. 4. Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets 5. Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime 6. End the freeze on gun violence research 7. Make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates. 8. Ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people. As Breitbart News has previously reported, expanded background checks would not have stopped the heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary; even Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) admit this. Moreover, as we reported on April 7th, murder rates were 19.3 percent higher while the federal "assault weapons" ban was in place (1994-2004). Why would we, then, spend over a hundred million dollars instituting another ban? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 16, 2014, 01:40:27 pm yOU HAVE TO READ THE LAST PARAGRAPH!!!
Bloomberg Plans a $50 Million Challenge to the N.R.A. Michael R. Bloomberg, making his first major political investment since leaving office, plans to spend $50 million this year building a nationwide grass-roots network to motivate voters who feel strongly about curbing gun violence, an organization he hopes can eventually outmuscle the National Rifle Association. Mr. Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, said gun control advocates need to learn from the N.R.A. and punish those politicians who fail to support their agenda — even Democrats whose positions otherwise align with his own. “They say, ‘We don’t care. We’re going to go after you,’ ” he said of the N.R.A. “ ‘If you don’t vote with us we’re going to go after your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. And we’re never going to stop.’ ” He added: “We’ve got to make them afraid of us.” An Ex-Mayor, in His Own WordsAPRIL 16, 2014 The considerable advantages that gun rights advocates enjoy — in intensity, organization and political clout — will not be easy to overcome. Indeed, Mr. Bloomberg has already spent millions of dollars trying to persuade members of Congress to support enhanced background check laws with virtually nothing to show for it. What is more, for many gun owners, the issue is a deeply personal one that energizes them politically, said Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, who dismissed the mayor’s plans. “He’s got the money to waste,” Mr. Pratt said. “So I guess he’s free to do so. But frankly, I think he’s going to find out why his side keeps losing.” The N.R.A. had no comment. Mr. Bloomberg’s blueprint reimagines the way gun control advocates have traditionally confronted the issue. Rather than relying so heavily on television ad campaigns, Mr. Bloomberg will put a large portion of his resources into the often-unseen field operations that have been effective for groups like the N.R.A. in driving single-issue, like-minded voters to the polls. Women, and mothers in particular, will be the focus of the organizing and outreach, a path that he and his advisers have modeled after groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. The plans call for a restructuring of the gun control groups he funds, Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. They will be brought under one new umbrella group called Everytown for Gun Safety. The strategy will focus not on sweeping federal restrictions to ban certain weapons, but instead will seek to expand the background check system for gun buyers both at the state and national levels. The $50 million could be significant: In recent years, the N.R.A. has spent only $20 million annually on political activities. The political groups affiliated with the billionaire Koch brothers, who are seeking to help Republicans take over the Senate, have spent about $30 million in the last six months. The group will zero in on 15 target states, from places like Colorado and Washington State, where gun control initiatives have advanced recently, to territory that is likely to be more hostile like Texas, Montana and Indiana. They have set a goal of signing up one million new supporters this year on top of the 1.5 million they already have. Previous efforts by Mr. Bloomberg to push gun control have touched off tensions with national Democratic leaders, because he has run negative ads against incumbent Democrats whom he views as insufficiently supportive of gun control. The Democratic leaders argue that Mr. Bloomberg threatens to hand control of the Senate to Republicans, which they say would doom any hope of passing gun control legislation. Mr. Bloomberg dismissed those fears, saying he was concerned only with the long term. “You can tell me all you want that the Republicans would be worse in the Senate than the Democrats,” he said. “Maybe they would. But that’s not what we’re talking about here.” Underscoring his desire to work with both parties, Mr. Bloomberg is bringing on a new advisory board with prominent Republican and Democratic figures. Tom Ridge, the former Pennsylvania governor and Homeland Security secretary under President George W. Bush; Eli Broad, the philanthropist; Warren Buffett, the investor; and Michael G. Mullen, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under both Mr. Bush and President Obama, will all be board members. Bloomberg should consider using his billions to change the conditions that create gun violence, such as poverty and social... Mr. Bloomberg acknowledged that his new efforts would require a dedication not just of money but also of time — two things he now has in abundance. “You’ve got to work at it piece by piece,” he added. “One mom and another mom. You’ve got to wear them down until they finally say, ‘Enough.’ ” He was also dismissive of skeptics who might question whether he could ever build an organization that rivaled the N.R.A. And he seemed unaware of, or unwilling to acknowledge, the ways in which his own persona — of a billionaire, Big Gulp-banning former mayor of New York — could undercut his efforts, especially in rural, conservative states. “I don’t know what your perception is of our reputation, and mine, the name Bloomberg around the country,” he said. But every place he goes, he added, “You’re a rock star. People yelling out of cabs, ‘Hey, way to go!’ ” His financial commitment to reducing gun violence could grow. When asked how much he was willing to spend, he tossed out the $50 million figure out as if he were describing the tip he left on a restaurant check. “I put $50 million this year, last year into coal, $53 million into oceans,” he said with a shrug, describing his clean energy and sustainable fishing initiatives. “Certainly a number like that, $50 million. Let’s see what happens.” The key to whether they can be effective, the mayor and his advisers said, will be turning out female voters, the sought-after swing bloc that has been pivotal in recent elections. “Right now, women, when they go to the polls, they vote on abortion, they vote on jobs, they vote on health care,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action. “We want one of those things to be gun violence prevention.” Mr. Bloomberg was introspective as he spoke, and seemed both restless and wistful. When he sat down for the interview, it was a few days before his 50th college reunion. His mortality has started dawning on him, at 72. And he admitted he was a bit taken aback by how many of his former classmates had been appearing in the “in memoriam” pages of his school newsletter. But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us/bloomberg-plans-a-50-million-challenge-to-the-nra.html?hpw&rref=politics&_r=2 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 16, 2014, 02:35:50 pm Quote But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.” Actually, unless he repents, this will happen... Proverbs 1:22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Pro 1:23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you. Pro 1:24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; Pro 1:25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: Pro 1:26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh; Pro 1:27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you. Pro 1:28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me: Pro 1:29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD: Pro 1:30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof. Pro 1:31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2014, 10:06:24 pm Look at all the double-speak here - "universal"? Don't be fooled - they're slowly wanting to give the feds all the power!
http://news.yahoo.com/nra-seeks-universal-gun-law-national-meeting-164012076.html NRA seeks universal gun law at national meeting 4/24/14 INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — With concealed weapons now legal in all 50 states, the National Rifle Association's focus at this week's annual meeting is less about enacting additional state protections than on making sure the permits already issued still apply when the gun owners travel across the country. The nation's largest gun-rights group, which officially opens its meeting of about 70,000 people Friday in Indianapolis, wants Congress to require that concealed weapons permits issued in one state be recognized everywhere, even when the local requirements differ. Advocates say the effort would eliminate a patchwork of state-specific regulations that lead to carriers unwittingly violating the law when traveling. "Right now it takes some legal research to find out where you are or are not legal depending on where you are," said Guy Relford, an attorney who has sued communities for violating an Indiana law that bars local gun regulation. "I don't think that's right." Opponents fear the measure would allow more lenient gun regulations to trump stricter ones when permit holders travel across state lines. "It's a race to the bottom," said Brian Malte, senior national policy director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "It's taking the lowest standards." The push for reciprocity comes as the gun rights lobby is arguably stronger than ever before, with more than 5 million dues-paying members. The NRA has successfully defeated numerous gun-control efforts in recent years, even after the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. With midterm elections looming, the organization's legislative wish list likely will be somewhat more modest than usual this year. The "reciprocity" effort on state concealed carry laws has strong support from Senate Republicans but narrowly missed being amended into last year's proposed expansion of gun sale background checks. Still, it faces long odds in Washington because Democrats control the Senate and White House. Following a federal judge's ruling striking down Illinois' ban on concealed weapons, the Legislature last summer passed the nation's final law allowing them. Illinois is among at least 10 states that currently don't recognize permits issued elsewhere, according to the NRA's website. Most others recognize permits from only a portion of the other states. NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam noted that gun laws vary widely, with some states requiring strict background checks and a handful not even requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon. "It is vital because crime can and does happen anywhere," Arulanandam said. "Just because an individual or a family crosses one state boundary to another doesn't mean they are immune to crime." Much like drivers are required to follow the traffic laws of the states they're in, Arulanandam says the legislation the NRA is seeking would ensure gun permit holders abide by the laws of states they're visiting. But Malte counters reciprocity could ultimately leave states "powerless" to stop even violent individuals who cross the state line with weapons. Several Republicans whose names have been floated as possible White House candidates will speak Friday at the convention's leadership forum. Those attending include Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Indiana Gov. Mike Pence. Rubio opposed limiting Second Amendment rights after the Sandy Hook shootings but also has opposed some gun-rights legislation. Jindal last year signed a number of gun bills into law, including one that creates stiff penalties for those who knowingly publish the names of gun permit holders. He angered gun-control supporters in 2010 when he approved a law allowing concealed handguns in churches, synagogues and mosques. Pence has been less forthcoming about his stance on gun rights since becoming governor in 2012 but signed a measure this year allowing guns in locked vehicles on school property. Led by Obama, gun-control advocates called for background checks for all gun purchasers and a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines following the Sandy Hook shootings. But a divided Congress denied the calls for change. Republicans could pass some sort of reciprocity bill next year if they retake the Senate. However, Obama would almost certainly veto it, and the votes likely wouldn't be there to override the veto. An Associated Press-GfK poll in December found 52 percent of Americans favored stricter gun laws, 31 percent wanted them left as they are and 15 percent said they should be loosened. Besides reciprocity, the organization also is seeking the right to carry legally owned guns on college campuses, which is prohibited in 27 states and the District of Columbia. NRA members have been vocally opposed to the appointment of Supreme Court justices deemed as sympathetic to gun control and have spoken out against an international treaty aimed at stemming the illegal weapons trade because they fear it could restrict civilian gun ownership. Gun control remains the chief concern of the NRA and its members. The old bumper sticker adage that "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns," still strikes a chord with many NRA members. "The laws are already there," said Allen Rumble, a Carmel, Ind., financial consultant with lifetime NRA membership. "Criminals don't follow rules." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 25, 2014, 10:53:13 am It's not in this article, but I've read in another how a boy got angry at a girl who rejected him to be his prom date.
http://www.wfsb.com/story/25339366/stabbing-reported-at-jonathan-law-high-school-in-milford Jonathan Law High School in Milford dismissed after stabbing Posted: Apr 25, 2014 5:46 AM PDT MILFORD, CT (WFSB) - Police responded to a stabbing at a high school in Milford on Friday morning. It happened at the Jonathan Law High School on Lansdale Avenue. Police called it an isolated incident between two students that happened inside the building. The victim was found in a stairwell. Sources said there may be a suspect in custody. Police said they were working with the Board of Education to dismiss students. The school was locked down beforehand. The school resource officer reported that the incident happened around 7:14 a.m. School officials told Eyewitness News that the situation was under control. Police said the school was safe. There's no word on the extent of the victim's injuries. Police said they plan to hold a news conference about it soon. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 28, 2014, 07:01:11 pm Yes - he made his comments at an NRA meeting!
Graham: ‘God has already done a universal background check on us’ 4/26/14 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/26/franklin-graham-god-has-already-done-universal-bac/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS INDIANAPOLIS — Rev. Franklin Graham, the keynote speaker at Sunday’s prayer breakfast at the NRA’s annual meeting, responded to calls for him to express his previously stated support for universal background checks on gun purchases by deferring to a higher power. “I’ve been asked to pray at the opening session of the NRA Annual Meeting and for their prayer breakfast,” Mr. Graham, president of Samaritan’s Purse and son of legendary evangelist Billy Graham, said on his Facebook page. “There’s been an ad circulating asking me to call on the NRA to support universal background checks. I want you to know that God has already done a universal background check on every one of us. He created you and knows everything about you. Nothing is hidden from His eyes.” Pastor Michael McBride, director of the PICO National Network’s Lifelines to Healing Campaign, said in a statement that he prays Mr. Graham will “speak truth to power” Sunday morning “and remind the NRA leadership that support for Second Amendment rights goes hand in hand with keeping guns away from young people, criminals and other dangerous people who shouldn’t have them.” Mr. Graham told Time Magazine last year that he and Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission supported President Obama’s efforts to increase background checks in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. school shootings in December 2012. Legislation to increase the checks fell victim to a filibuster in the U.S. Senate last year. “As ministers, we agreed together that we could stand on a united front for universal background checks,” Mr. Graham said. “We think that’s reasonable and responsible.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 02, 2014, 09:56:44 am http://www.ammoland.com/2014/05/boehner-secretly-plotting-to-stab-gun-owners-in-the-back/#axzz30Z7clepW
Boehner Secretly Plotting to Stab Gun Owners in the Back 5/1/14 Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- In a closed-door meeting of wealthy contributors in Las Vegas, House Speaker John Boehner said he was “hell-bent on getting [anti-gun immigration amnesty] done this year.” And earlier this week, the Speaker viciously mocked conservative Republicans for opposing him on this issue. The wily Boehner had led his conservative Republican members to believe the issue was shelved for the year. Now it appears that Boehner is simply planting a trap for Republicans and gun owners — springing this Obama-backed proposal when it’s too late to primary anti-gun Republican amnesty supporters. Gun Owners of America has argued all along that Second Amendment supporters have “a dog in this fight.” In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed an immigration amnesty bill for about 3 million illegals. It was supposed to be accompanied by new enforcement measures – which never happened. Instead, the prospect of citizenship only attracted over ten million new illegals. And those granted amnesty in 1986 turned California from a “swing state” into an anti-gun nightmare. A Pew poll from last year indicated that if illegal immigrants were given citizenship, they would vote for liberal, anti-gun candidates by an 8-to-1 margin. So by the time that a net 8,000,000-plus additional anti-gun voters emerge from Obama’s new proposal, it will be far too late to do anything about it. Handgun bans. Total gun registration. Confiscation programs. SWAT teams. These will be the inevitable consequence of adding 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters to the electorate. Boehner’s Republican members understand that anti-gun immigration amnesty could cost Republicans the Senate and House in November — and would damage their prospects even more in long-term. This is why, up until now, he was pretending to shelve the issue. Boehner thinks he can get away with bushwhacking the Republican members who elected him Speaker. But the good news is that there is a procedure for unseating the Speaker, and we are beginning to work with members in order to invoke it. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 05, 2014, 10:21:22 am Supreme Court Rejects Appeal On Guns In Public
The Supreme Court has turned away another case over whether Americans have a constitutional right to be armed in public. The justices on Monday let stand a lower court ruling upholding a New Jersey requirement for gun owners to show an urgent need to carry a handgun outside their home for self-defense. Both a police official and a judge must approve the permits. The New Jersey law was challenged by four individuals and two gun groups, and had the backing of 19 states. The justices turned away similar questions on at least two earlier occasions. The court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller focused mainly on the right to defend one's own home, but left for another day how broadly the Second Amendment may protect gun rights elsewhere. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/05/supreme-court-guns_n_5266686.html?&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 05, 2014, 05:30:42 pm There are 6 Roman Catholics on the USSC(yes, that includes Reagan and Bush appointments) - the RCC supports gun control. Nuff said.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 05, 2014, 11:15:03 pm Suspect in custody after Ohio VA hospital shooting
5/5/14 http://news.yahoo.com/suspect-custody-ohio-va-hospital-shooting-180311366.html;_ylt=AwrSbmq4YGhTdl4AgVtXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBsOXB2YTRjBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkAw-- Georgia's Paine College locked down; shooting reported 5/5/14 http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s3423870.shtml?cat=565 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 19, 2014, 10:59:25 am Targeted? Gun sellers say ‘high risk’ label from feds cuts off banking options, restricts business
Obama plan pressures financial institutions Gun retailers say the Obama administration is trying to put them out of business with regulations and investigations that bypass Congress and choke off their lines of credit, freeze their assets and prohibit online sales. Since 2011, regulators have increased scrutiny on banks’ customers. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2011 urged banks to better manage the risks of their merchant customers who employ payment processors, such as PayPal, for credit card transactions. The FDIC listed gun retailers as “high risk” along with **** stores and drug paraphernalia shops. Meanwhile, the Justice Department has launched Operation Choke Point, a credit card fraud probe focusing on banks and payment processors. The threat of enforcement has prompted some banks to cut ties with online gun retailers, even if those companies have valid licenses and good credit histories. “This administration has very clearly told the banking industry which customers they feel represent ‘reputational risk’ to do business with,” said Peter Weinstock, a lawyer at Hunton & Williams LLP. “So financial institutions are reacting to this extraordinary enforcement arsenal by being ultra-conservative in who they do business with: Any companies that engage in any margin of risk as defined by this administration are being dropped.” A Justice Department representative said the agency is conducting several investigations that aim to hold accountable banks “who are knowingly assisting fraudulent merchants who harm consumers.” “We’re committed to ensuring that our efforts to combat fraud do not discourage or inhibit the lawful conduct of these honest merchants,” the Justice Department said in a May 7 blog post. But gun retailers say their businesses are being targeted in the executive branch’s efforts: • T.R. Liberti, owner and operator of Top Gun Firearms Training & Supply in Miami, has felt the sting firsthand. Last month, his local bank, BankUnited N.A., dumped his online business from its service. PHOTOS: Armed and liberal: Left-leaning celebrities who are pro-gun An explanatory email from the bank said: “This letter in no way reflects any derogatory reasons for such action on your behalf. But rather one of industry. Unfortunately your company’s line of business is not commensurate with the industries we work with.” • Black Rifle Armory in Henderson, Nevada, had its bank accounts frozen this month as the bank tried to determine whether any of Black Rifle’s online transactions were suspicious. • In 2012, Bank of America suddenly dropped the 12-year account of McMillan Group International, a gun manufacturer in Phoenix, even though the company had a good credit history, the owner said. Gun parts maker American Spirit Arms in Scottsdale, Arizona, received similar treatment by Bank of America, the country’s largest banking institution. “This seems to be happening with greater frequency and to many more dealers,” said Joe Sirochman, owner of American Spirit Arms. “At first, it was the bigger guys — gun parts manufacturers or high-profile retailers. Now the smaller mom-and-pop shops are being choked out, and they need their cash to buy inventory. Freezing their assets will put them out of business.” Choking off access to banks After McMillan Group owner Kelly McMillan publicized Bank of America’s action on his Facebook account, he found that thousands of small gun-shop owners across the country were in the same situation. Banks were either dropping them, freezing their accounts or refusing to process their online sales, so he opened a credit card processing company for the gun industry called McMillan Merchant Solutions. “Four generations of my family have been in this industry. This is my way to give back,” said Mr. McMillan, adding that many of his customers were denied banking access because of the nature of their business. “This is an attempt by the federal government to keep people from buying guns and a way for them to combat the Second Amendment rights we have. It’s a covert way for them to control our right to manufacture guns and individuals to buy guns.” Story Continues → Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/18/targeted-gun-sellers-say-high-risk-label-from-feds/#ixzz32B5E39Gv Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 19, 2014, 12:17:21 pm Quote Since 2011, regulators have increased scrutiny on banks’ customers. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2011 urged banks to better manage the risks of their merchant customers who employ payment processors, such as PayPal, for credit card transactions. The FDIC listed gun retailers as “high risk” along with **** stores and drug paraphernalia shops. And the banking system is also doing the same to churches in America - instead of the normal 30 or so year mortgage that homeowners, business owners, etc would get for their homes/buildings, they ONLY get 5 years(where they have to pay everything back, principal + interest, at the end of the 5 years). With that being said - it's been going on since 2011? And even the "conservative" media outlets like the Washington Times, FOX, etc wait until NOW to say anything about it? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 23, 2014, 07:16:49 am A Durham, North Carolina restaurant with a sign on its front door reading, "No Weapons, No Concealed Firearms," was robbed at gunpoint on May 19.
Gunsnfreedom.com published a photograph of the sign on May 21, making "The Pit" restaurant a self-declared gun free zone--the same kind of zone Michael Bloomberg and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America pressure other restaurants into becoming. According to Durham's ABC 11, around 9 PM "three men wearing hoodies entered the restaurant through the back doors with pistols, and forced several staff members to lie on the floor." The armed men "also assaulted two employees during the crime." The suspects are still on the loose. When Chipotle announced their intended gun ban by saying the sight of law-abiding citizens carrying guns caused customers "anxiety and discomfort," Breitbart News responded with a simple question: If law-abiding citizens caused customers "anxiety and discomfort," what will those customers feel like when a criminal enters Chipotle, now confident that no victim in the restaurant is allowed to have a gun which which to fight back? Perhaps the armed attack on "The Pit" can be of some help in answering this question. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/22/Restaurant-With-No-Weapons-No-Concealed-Firearms-Sign-Robbed-At-Gunpoint Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 23, 2014, 04:32:27 pm Armed Robbers Find A New Hangout In Jack In The Box
Third robbery in a month What seems to be the new hangout spot for gun-toting villains, Jack in the Box, suffered their 3rd armed robbery in the few short weeks since they caved to Shannon Watts and her Everytown for Gun Safety campaign calling on the restaurant to restrict its gun-owning and law abiding patrons from carrying firearms into the establishment. The latest robbery happened for a second time in Houston, where four armed men wearing masks robbed the store in broad daylight. According to click2houston.com, “the men rushed into the restaurant around 12:30 p.m. Tuesday, at the height of the lunch rush, and demanded money from two customers and employees,” before rushing out and driving away in a black Toyota 4Runner. A patron who was there followed the men, eventually helping officers detain the driver. The other three armed men are still at large. Brian Luscomb, the Jack in the Box Vice President of Corporate Communications, said after caving to the pressure of the anti-gun group, “Creating a warm and inviting environment for all of our guests and employees is a top priority for Jack in the Box. The presence of guns inside a restaurant could create an uncomfortable situation for our guests and employees and lead to unintended consequences. While we respect the rights of all our guests, we would prefer that guests not bring their guns inside our restaurants.” http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/armed-robbers-find-new-hangout-jack-box Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 23, 2014, 04:59:28 pm I worked in retail 20 years ago(Blockbuster Video) - pretty much, these retail stores are the last stores anyone would want to rob b/c the cash registers are only allowed to carry so much(ie-when it gets up to a certain limit like $400 or so, they clean it out and put it in a safe, and do as best as they can to keep a max of $200 in them).
IOW, anyone who wants to rob any of these stores SHOULD know that it's NOT worth spending 15 years in jail over a meaningless couple of hundred of bucks. I once knew someone in New Orleans who was sentenced to 40 years for robbing a convenience store. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 24, 2014, 05:24:54 pm http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspected-california-gunman-identified-son-movie-director-n113841
Suspected California Gunman Identified as Son of Movie Director 5/24/14 Elliot Rodger, the 22-year-old man suspected of having gone on a killing rampage Friday night near the University of California, Santa Barbara, may have done so out of intense frustration at his rejection by women, which he detailed in shocking online videos. Alan Shifman, an attorney for Rodger's father, Peter Rodger — an assistant director on the blockbuster "Hunger Games" movie series — confirmed to NBC News on Saturday that Rodger was the man suspected of having killed six people and wounded seven others Friday night as he stalked the streets of Isla Vista, an unincorporated community adjacent to Santa Barbara about 100 miles northwest of Los Angeles. The gunman also died following the shooting spree, but the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office doesn't know whether he died in a shootout with officers or from a self-inflicted wound. A semiautomatic handgun was recovered in the vehicle, investigators said. "It's obviously the work of a madman," Santa Barbara Sheriff Bill Brown said at a news conference early Saturday. The Rodgers family is cooperating with investigators, said Shifman, who said it was Rodger's own parents who alerted authorities to the distressing videos their son posted to YouTube — videos in which Rodger, a student at nearby Santa Barbara City College, complains that his college years have been torture because he could never get a date. In the chilling videos, nine of which were posted Thursday, he vows "retribution" and "revenge against humanity" — specifically against the residents of a sorority house, all of whom he threatens to kill. "I'm 22 years old, and I'm still a virgin. I've never even kissed a girl," Rodger says. "College is the time when everyone experiences those things such as sex and fun and pleasure. But in those years, I've had to rot in loneliness. It's not fair. "If I can't have you girls, I will destroy you," he says, sometimes laughing at his own audacity. Afterward, he promises, "I will take to the streets of Isla Vista and slay every single person I see there." "You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one — the true alpha male," he boasts. Peter Rodgers' attorney told NBC News that Elliot Rodger lived with a form of Asperger syndrome, a disorder on the autism spectrum. There is no known link between Asperger's and violent behavior. Before he and his family moved to the U.S. in 1996, Peter Rodger was an acclaimed film photographer in Britain, the British newspaper The Telegraph reported. His wife — Elliot Rodger's stepmother — is Soumaya Akaaboune, an actress who appeared in "Green Zone" in 2010 with Matt Damon and stars in the French version of the "Real Housewives" television series. The Hollywood connection eerily recalls a similar rampage in the same town 13 years ago, when David Attias, the son of director Dan Attias — whose credits include "Entourage" and other well-known TV shows — ran down and killed four people with his car near the university after having being spurned by a woman. A memorial to those four victims sits in a park in the center of Isla Vista. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 25, 2014, 02:13:31 pm Uhm...California has the TOUGHEST gun control laws in the entire country! You have to wait FIFTEEN days to obtain a firearm!(something which never even crossed Obama's and Clintons' minds, FWIW)
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-victims-dad-deadly-rampage-233719408.html Tearful plea from victim's dad in deadly rampage 5/25/14 GOLETA, Calif. (AP) — A man whose son was among the victims killed in a shooting rampage near a California university quaked with grief and rage Saturday as he described his "lost and broken" family and the proliferation of guns he believes led to his son's death. "Our son Christopher and six others are dead," Richard Martinez told reporters gathered outside a sheriff's station for a news conference the day after the shootings near the University of California, Santa Barbara, where the 20-year-old son was a sophomore. "You don't think it'll happen to your child until it does." Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez, of Los Osos, Calif., was the last of six people killed by suspect Elliot Rodger before the gunman apparently shot and killed himself, authorities said. Martinez choked back tears as he spoke, then grew angrier as he talked about gun laws and lobbyists. "The talk about gun rights. What about Chris' right to live?" Martinez said. "When will enough people say: 'Stop this madness! We don't have to live like this! Too many people have died!" He then punctuated his words as he said, "We should say to ourselves: 'Not! One! More!'" before dissolving into tears and falling to his knees as he stepped from the podium. Martinez said he talked to his son just 45 minutes before he died inside the IV Deli Mart, where bullet holes and blood could still be seen on Saturday. After already killing five others at his apartment and outside a sorority house, Rodger walked into the deli and shot Michael-Martinez, authorities said. Michaels-Martinez was an English major who planned to go to London next year and to law school after graduation, his father said. He pulled out a photo of his son as a small child in Chicago Cubs baseball uniform and said they used to call him "mini-Sammy Sosa," referring to the former Cubs star. "Chris was a really great kid," Martinez said. "Ask anyone who knew him. His death has left our family lost and broken." Friends said Michaels-Martinez, who served as residential adviser at a dorm last year, was the kind of guy who welcomed strangers into his home. It's not clear whether Rodger knew Katherine Cooper and Veronika Weiss, but they were standing outside a sorority house he was targeting and square in the path of his rampage, authorities said. They became the first ones fatally shot. Rodger had stabbed and killed three male victims at his apartment already, then drove to the Alpha Phi sorority house, where he fired from across the street and shot three women who were nearby. One of them, whose name has not been released, was injured. Cooper, 22, and Weiss, 19, both UC Santa Barbara students, were killed. Cooper, who was from Chino Hills, Calif., was about to graduate with a degree in art history. Her friend Courtney Benjamin said Cooper was a painter with an outgoing side. "She was a self-proclaimed princess and I love her for that," Benjamin said. "And I know she has a crown on her head today." Weiss was first-year student from Westlake Village. "She was always a happy person," said Eric Pursley, who worked with Weiss at a Target store in Thousand Oaks last year. A pile of flowers grew on the lawn Saturday as crying students wandered up to the spot, shook their heads and hugged each other. UCSB senior Kyley Scarlet, who lives next door and has served as president of her own sorority, said all three who were shot are sorority members, but neither of Alpha Phi nor her own. Scarlet said she was very disturbed by the video describing his anger at sorority girls. "It's hard thinking my actions, being part of a sorority, led him to do this," she said. "When I saw that video I was shaking and crying." Title: Three shot dead at South Carolina oceanfront hotel Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 25, 2014, 09:19:24 pm http://news.yahoo.com/three-shot-dead-south-carolina-oceanfront-hotel-174952304.html
Three shot dead at South Carolina oceanfront hotel 5/25/14 (Reuters) - Three people were killed and a fourth wounded in a shooting at a oceanfront hotel in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, one of the most popular tourist destinations in the U.S. Southeast, police said on Sunday. Officers responded to a call of shots fired at the Bermuda Sands resort on the Myrtle Beach boardwalk around 11 p.m. EDT on Saturday, according to the Myrtle Beach Police Department. Two men and one woman were pronounced dead at the scene and the fourth was transported to a local hospital in unknown condition, he said. The shooting came on a weekend when Myrtle Beach was packed with visitors for the Memorial Day holiday weekend, the unofficial start of the summer season, and for an annual sports rally called the Atlantic Beach Bikefest. "We certainly don't like to see any type of incident where somebody dies during this event, or any event that Myrtle Beach has," Myrtle Beach Police Captain David Knipes told WISTV. "To have three people (killed) in one night is kind of a big thing; we only had two homicides for a total last year," he said. Two of the victims were gunned down in the hotel's breezeway, authorities said. There was no immediate word on a motive and there had not been any arrests by early Sunday, police said. Witnesses told the Sun News they heard fighting on a sidewalk outside the hotel before gunshots were fired. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 27, 2014, 09:02:37 am CNN Exploits Father's Grief For Gun Control Push
"My kid died because nobody responded to what happened at Sandy Hook." Did CNN learn nothing from ghoulish Piers Morgan's exploitation of the murdered children of Newtown, CT? Apparently not. Proclaiming Richard Martinez the "public face of gun control advocates in the aftermath of the six killings in Isla Vista," CNN turned on their camera and prodded the grieving father into a fit of emotional fervor and outrage so they could have compelling, dramatic video that fits their anti-2nd amendment agenda: “What has changed? Have we learned nothing? These things are going to continue until somebody does something, so where the hell is the leadership? Where the hell are these people we elect to Congress that we spend so much money on? These people are getting rich sitting in Congress, what do they do? They don’t take care of our kids. My kid died because nobody responded to what happened at Sandy Hook. Those parents lost little kids. It’s bad enough that I lost my 20-year-old, but I had 20 years with my son, that’s all I’ll have. But those people lost their children at six and seven years old. How do you think they feel? And who’s talking to them now? Who is doing anything for them now? Who is standing up for those kids that died back then in an elementary school? Why wasn’t something done? It’s outrageous!” No doubt Mr. Martinez is grieving, angry and emotional. And he is looking for answers to a horrific event that makes no sense to him. At no point is the fact that just as many innocent victims Friday evening were killed with a knife as with a gun raised by the CNN interviewer. It should be noted that those grieving parents were not given a TV forum to advocate for "knife control." Meanwhile, CNN dramatically produced a video package showing photos of Martinez' dead son and the emotionally heart-wrenching fury of Mr. Martinez so that all CNN viewers can participate in the ghoulish exercise of watching a father go through the anger phase of the grieving process. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/cnn-exploits-fathers-grief-gun-control-push Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 27, 2014, 09:06:15 am Peter King Exploits California Shooting, Calls For Expanded Background Checks (But Shooter Passed Background Check)
Rep. King ignored the fact that Elliot Rodger, the man behind the murder spree, passed the background check needed to buy the firearm he used in the shooting I In the wake of Friday's horrific murder spree in Santa Barbara California, Congressman Peter King (R-NY) called for expanded background checks. What Rep. King ignored is that Elliot Rodger, the man behind the murder spree, passed the background check needed to buy the firearm he used in the shooting. Like the Democrats exploiting the horrible attack to push their anti-gun agendas, King, a Republican, joined the charge of politicians calling for a review of gun control legislation on Sunday. King, a longtime advocate of stricter gun control policies, told the Washington Post that the incident reinforces the argument for expanding background checks for gun owners. “This tragedy demonstrates once again the need to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill,” he said. King added that any effort to convince House leadership to bring gun control legislation up this summer will be "very difficult," saying gun control advocates in Congress need to "focus the discussion" surrounding mental illness and access to firearms. The Republican said his party should not give up efforts to thwart powerful gun advocacy groups, according to the Washington Post. “Even though this issue may not be popular in particular congressional districts, if we want to be a national party, we ought to be looking closely at it,” he said. King was either unaware or purposely ignoring some of the facts of the case: Rodger passed the background check needed to buy the firearm used in the shooting, a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation told CNN. The official said nothing had been found in the gun trace to indicate Rodger shouldn’t have qualified to buy a gun. Some other facts: Rodger's parents, who called the police about his instability, recognized Rodger’s mental illness. A gun was not the only weapon in Rodger's murder spree; he began by stabbing three men repeatedly at his home, and tried to kill people with his car. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/peter-king-exploits-california-shooting-calls-expanded-background-checks-shooter-passed Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 27, 2014, 09:08:02 am Democrat Wastes No Time Calling For Federal Gun Ban
"I am going to urge that we bring back those bills, maybe reconfigure them to center on mental health." In the wake of the tragedy that left 3 stabbed to death and another 3 shot to death in Santa Barbara, Democrats wasted no time in calling for a new push for federal gun control. After intoning that tens of thousands of people have been killed by guns since Sandy Hook, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) appeared on CBS’ Face the Nation and said: I hope, I really sincerely hope, that this tragedy, this unimaginable, unspeakable tragedy, will provide an impetus to bring back measures that would keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people who are severely troubled or deranged like this young man was. Blumenthal continued: We need mental health resources, and that initiative I hope will provide common ground, a point of consensus, that will bring us together in the Congress and enable the majority — 90 percent of the American people want background checks — to be heard. The host informed Blumenthal that “the sheriff told us that there were no flags that would have prompted a check on the legally purchased weapons that Elliot Rodger had, and he didn't seem to have large or larger than normal size magazines for his weapons. Do you believe legislation the Senate did not pass would have made any difference in this case?" Blumenthal answered that the legislation that failed would have given more resources to law enforcement to have a greater screening for this kind of derangement: The legislation that failed to pass support from 55 senators would have provided a mental health initiative with more resources, greater ability for the Santa Barbara police to intervene, to use the sheriff's word, to have professionals trained in diagnosing and detecting this kind of derangement. Obviously not every kind of gun violence is going to be prevented by laws out of Washington but at least we can make a start and I am going to urge that we bring back those bills, maybe reconfigure them to center on mental health, which is a point where we can agree. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/democrat-wastes-no-time-calling-federal-gun-ban Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 27, 2014, 11:24:54 am And remember last year when Rick Warren was craftily pushing for gun control when his son committed suicide(or supposedly) - Warren himself, as we all know, is from California.
None of this is a coincidence. And again - CA has the STRICTEST gun control laws in the nation! Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 30, 2014, 06:00:35 pm http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/30/us-usa-college-evacuation-idUSKBN0EA21E20140530
5/30/14 Los Angeles college evacuated after report of man with gun (Reuters) - A Los Angeles college and nearby occupational center were being evacuated and locked down on Friday after reports that a missing and suicidal man could be armed and in the vicinity, police said. A Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman said officers were searching for the missing 22-year-old man near Pierce College, a community college located in Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley. The school issued an "emergency alert" on Twitter telling students not to come to campus. The West Valley Occupational Center was also placed on lockdown, police spokeswoman Norma Eisenman said. The missing man was described as wearing all black clothing and carrying a backpack and a skateboard, she said. The incident comes a week after 22-year-old Elliot Rodger shot and killed three students near the University of California, Santa Barbara, campus. Rodger had earlier stabbed three people to death in his apartment. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 02, 2014, 02:25:11 pm Make no mistake - the bad guys comes come from WITHIN - so let's be careful in terms of focusing too much attention on these Obama-types.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-02/nra-decides-good-guys-with-guns-are-weirdos?cmpid=yhoo NRA Decides Good Guys With Guns Are Weirdos Jun 2, 2014 12:46 PM EDT By Francis Wilkinson "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said National Rifle Association chieftain Wayne LaPierre. Unless, apparently, the good guy with a gun is in Texas and obeying the state's open-carry law while hunting down some Mexican food or a cup of joe. According to a May 30 post on the NRA website, exercising one's rights in such a manner is, well, a little weird. It's hard to imagine where open-carry advocates got the notion that they must be armed and ready at every minute of the day. Perhaps LaPierre can provide a clue. Here is his threat analysis of life in the U.S., delivered in the days after the Newtown, Connecticut massacre: Quote The truth is that our society is populated by an unknown number of genuine monsters -- people so deranged, so evil, so possessed by voices and driven by demons that no sane person can possibly ever comprehend them. They walk among us every day. And does anybody really believe that the next Adam Lanza isn’t planning his attack on a school he’s already identified at this very moment? How many more copycats are waiting in the wings . . . . A dozen more killers? A hundred? More? LaPierre has detailed the overwhelming threats Americans face from "terrorists, home invaders, drug cartels, carjackers, 'knockout' gamers, rapers, haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping mall killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of violence against our power grids or vicious waves of chemicals or disease that could collapse as a society that sustains us all." Is it any wonder that open-carry advocates would fear going into a Chipotle or Starbucks without a loaded semi-automatic rifle to keep themselves safe from the horrors LaPierre so exhaustively describes? Yet here is the NRA last week discouraging Texans from being on their guard at every moment. Quote Yet while unlicensed open carry of long guns is also typically legal in most places, it is a rare sight to see someone sidle up next to you in line for lunch with a 7.62 rifle slung across his chest, much less a whole gaggle of folks descending on the same public venue with similar arms. Let's not mince words, not only is it rare, it's downright weird and certainly not a practical way to go normally about your business while being prepared to defend yourself. Not practical? Downright weird? What's not practical about behaving like you're in a war zone in a land terrorized by monsters, robbers, rapists, shopping-mall killers, terrorists and -- well, it's a long list. Open carry in Texas represents precisely the world the NRA's leader has envisioned: a fully-armed, powder-keg democracy where anyone can kill at a moment's notice. It's heartening to learn the NRA doesn't really want that after all. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 02, 2014, 05:49:54 pm http://news.yahoo.com/texas-gun-groups-clash-nra-armed-protests-public-203030317.html
Texas gun groups clash with NRA on armed protests in public spaces 6/2/14 DALLAS (Reuters) - Texas gun rights groups that have toted rifles and shotguns in public in campaigns to show support for the open carrying of weapons blasted the NRA on Monday for calling those appeals "foolish" and "counterproductive." Open Carry Texas, Texas Carry, Come And Take It – Texas and Gun Rights Across America accused the National Rifle Association, the nation's largest lobbying group for firearm ownership, of not supporting all gun rights and vowed to withdraw their support if the NRA did not retract the criticism. "It is unfortunate that an organization that claims to be dedicated to the preservation of gun rights would attack another organization fighting so hard for those rights in Texas," the groups said in a statement. The groups are advocating unlicensed, open carry of handguns, pointing to laws in places like Texas that allow for the unlicensed, open carrying of long guns, such as rifles. The NRA statement, issued on their website on Friday, said tactics used by some groups "can be downright scary" to people not used to seeing others arming themselves. "Using guns merely to draw attention to yourself in public not only defies common sense, it shows a lack of consideration and manners. That's not the Texas way. And that's certainly not the NRA way." It added that while Texas may be second to none in gun culture in the United States, "a small number have recently crossed the line from enthusiasm to downright foolishness." On Saturday, Open Carry Tarrant County, helped lead a campaign at a Home Depot parking lot in suburban Fort Worth attended by about 150 people with rifles, shotguns and military-style weapons. Open Carry Tarrant County, a group seen as being among the most active in the campaigns, has parted ways with Open Carry Texas after disagreeing with the statewide group's call to members to stop carrying long guns in restaurants. The Tarrant County group said it wants to make people feel safe being around law-abiding citizens carrying guns. The NRA statement comes as Sonic Drive-In and Chili's Grill & Bar issued statements last week asking that customers refrain from bringing firearms into their establishments, saying the weapons can create an uncomfortable atmosphere for other diners. A number from national eateries, including Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc, and Jack in the Box Inc, have also asked patrons to keep their firearms at home. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yeah, where are Obama and Diane Fienstein in all of this? ::) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 06, 2014, 11:17:22 am Again, beware of all of the enemies that come from WITHIN!
Texas Gun Group: No More Carrying Rifles in Target, Wal-Mart 6/5/14 http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/05/texas-gun-group-no-more-rifles-in-target/?mod=yahoo_hs The president of the Texas gun group scolded by the National Rifle Association for bringing rifles into restaurants and retail stores said his group has already quit carrying large guns through Target Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.WMT -0.11% locations. “It was distracting from our mission,” C.J. Grisham, the president of Open Carry Texas, said Thursday. “Our purpose and goal is to get open carry of handguns to pass into law. The conversation was allowed to shift by gun-control extremists to whether guns could be carried at all.” Mr. Grisham said the NRA’s piece — which called the rifle demonstrations “downright weird” — was “ignorant.” He said his group has received no direct apology from the NRA, which has since removed the essay from its website and replaced it with a 12-minute interview of NRA Executive Director Chris W. Cox apologizing for the essay’s publication. “If the NRA wants to work with us to get open carry passed, that’s great, but were going to fight to get open carry passed with or without the NRA,” Mr. Grisham said. “They are not the copyright or patent holders of the Second Amendment.” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said the group had nothing to say about the saga beyond Mr. Cox’s statement. In the midst of the Open Carry Texas-NRA spat, the Mike Bloomberg-funded Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America on Tuesday launched a petition drive to ask Target to forbid guns in its stores. Mr. Grisham said pictures used by Moms Demand Action of Open Carry members toting rifles in a Dallas-area Target were taken in January and posted to the Internet in March. Open Carry Texas, Mr. Grisham said, stopped bringing its rifles into stores like Target because Texas law forbids firearms in places where alcohol is sold. Mr. Grisham said rescinding the alcohol-guns prohibition is among his group’s top priorities. “What Moms Demand Action is doing is digging into our photo archives and trying to smear us,” Mr. Grisham said. “Really, they’re desperate, and that’s why they’re going off into our photo archives.” Moms Demand Action spokeswoman Erika Soto Lamb said the group is only using the photos Open Carry Texas posted online. “This isn’t about the guns – it’s about the people carrying the guns. How are we to know whether they are ‘good guys’ or ‘bad guys’?” Ms. Soto Lamb said. “When we’re shopping with our kids at Target, how are we to know if the guy carrying a rifle is a political activist or if we should duck and cover?” Now, instead of going into retail outlets, Open Carry Texas’s members meet in public spaces like parking lots or in stores and restaurants that give them permission to demonstrate, Mr. Grisham said. Most restaurateurs have no problem with Open Carry Texas members dining with their guns, he said. “More than 95% of our local press is very positive,” Mr. Grisham said. “We’re getting to the point now where really it’s a non-story. There’s no controversy in Texas. The controversy is based out of New York.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 10, 2014, 11:04:26 am Official with Multnomah County, Ore., Sheriff's Office confirms 'tactical incident' at Reynolds High School - @BrentKOIN
More than 60 law enforcement, 19 medical personnel on scene of Reynolds High School in Oregon after reports of shots fired - @KOINNews Response at Reynolds High School is for an active shooter, Multnomah County, Ore., sheriff's office spokesman confirms - @KGWNews Parents told to stay away from Reynolds High School as police respond to reported active shooting - @KOINNews Read more on koin.com Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 12, 2014, 07:25:57 pm Yeah, it's as if this has become the "new norm" now.
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 16, 2014, 10:52:04 am DON'T be fooled into thinking that it's LARGELY OBAMA spearheading gun control...
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-rules-straw-purchaser-law-140713053--finance.html Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law 6/16/14 WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court sided with gun control groups and the Obama administration Monday, ruling that the federal ban on "straw" purchases of guns can be enforced even if the ultimate buyer is legally allowed to own a gun. The justices ruled 5-4 that the law applied to a Virginia man who bought a gun with the intention of transferring it to a relative in Pennsylvania who was not prohibited from owning firearms. The ruling settles a split among appeals courts over federal gun laws intended to prevent sham buyers from obtaining guns for the sole purpose of giving them to another person. The laws were part of Congress' effort to make sure firearms did not get into the hands of unlawful recipients. Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan said the federal government's elaborate system of background checks and record-keeping requirements help law enforcement investigate crimes by tracing guns to their buyers. Those provisions would mean little, she said, if a would-be gun buyer could evade them by simply getting another person to buy the gun a fill out the paperwork. In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the language of the law does not support making it a crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner. The case began after Bruce James Abramski, Jr. bought a Glock 19 handgun in Collinsville, Virginia, in 2009 and later transferred it to his uncle in Easton, Pennsylvania. Abramski, a former police officer, had assured the Virginia dealer he was the "actual buyer" of the weapon even though he had already offered to buy the gun for his uncle using a police discount. Abramski purchased the gun three days after his uncle had written him a check for $400 with "Glock 19 handgun" written in the memo line. During the transaction, he answered "yes" on a federal form asking "Are you the actual transferee buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you." Police later arrested Abramski after they thought he was involved in a bank robbery in Rocky Mount, Virginia. No charges were ever filed on the bank robbery, but officials charged him with making false statements about the purchase of the gun. A federal district judge rejected Abramski's argument that he was not a straw purchaser because his uncle was eligible to buy firearms and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. The Obama administration had argued that accepting Abramski's defense would impair the ability of law enforcement officials to trace firearms involved in crimes and keep weapons away from people who are not eligible to buy them. The administration said that even if the purchase is made on behalf of someone eligible to buy a firearm, the purpose of the law is frustrated since Congress requires the gun dealers — not purchasers — to run federal background checks on people buying guns. Abramski claimed Congress' goal was to prevent guns from falling into the hands of convicted felons and others barred from owning firearms. He said that goal is not furthered if the gun is transferred to someone legally allowed to own guns. The National Rifle Association sided with Abramski, asserting that the government wrongly interpreted the law and improperly expanded the scope of gun regulations. Twenty-six states also submitted a brief supporting Abramski's view of the law, while nine states and Washington, D.C., filed papers bolstering the Obama administration. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 27, 2014, 03:04:02 pm http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-upholds-colorado-gun-laws-dismisses-lawsuit-000320932.html
Federal judge upholds Colorado gun laws, dismisses lawsuit 6/26/14 DENVER (Reuters) - A federal judge upheld gun laws on Thursday introduced by Colorado in the wake of deadly shooting rampages there and in Connecticut, dismissing a lawsuit brought by sheriffs, gun shops, outfitters and shooting ranges. The two laws, passed in 2013 by Colorado's Democratic-controlled legislature with scant Republican support, banned ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds and required background checks for all private gun sales and transfers. The bills were introduced in response to a shooting spree in 2012 that killed 12 people at a suburban Denver movie theater, and the slaying later that same year of 20 children and six adults at an elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. But they immediately met resistance from critics, including most of Colorado's elected sheriffs, who said they severely restricted citizens' constitutional right to own and bear arms. Last year, voters recalled two key Democratic members of the legislature that approved the controversial measures. After a two-week civil trial, U.S. District Chief Judge Marcia Krieger ruled the lawsuit lacked standing and said no evidence had been produced which showed limiting magazines to 15 rounds seriously diminished the ability to defend oneself. "Of the many law enforcement officials called to testify, none were able to identify a single instance in which they were involved where a single civilian fired more than 15 shots in self defense," she said in her ruling. Responding to complaints about expanded background checks, she said there were more than 600 firearms dealers in the state which actively perform private checks, and that it takes an average of less than 15 minutes for a check to be run by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. Governor John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who signed the bills into law, was named as the defendant in the lawsuit. Colorado has seen two of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. In addition to the 2012 theater shooting, it was the site of a 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, where two teenagers shot dead a teacher and 12 other students before committing suicide. But it is also a state where gun ownership is treasured. Colorado's Attorney General John Suthers, a Republican, said his office never claimed the laws were "good, wise, or sound policy," but that it had fulfilled its responsibility to defend the constitutionality of the state law in question. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 28, 2014, 09:39:48 pm http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/03/27/300-thousand-connecticut-gun-owners-face-jail-time-under-new-law
3/27/14 300 Thousand Connecticut Gun Owners Face Jail Time Under New Law TownHall.com: The scene above isn't from a foreign country. It's happening right here in America. Law-abiding gun owners in Connecticut were recently forced to line up and register their firearms with the state government by January 1 of this year. Now, citizens who either missed the deadline, or simply refused to submit to the blatantly unconstitutional law, are facing felony charges and up to five years in prison. In fact, anti-gun groups and their allies in the state media are outright campaigning for authorities to "use the background check database" to round up an estimated 300,000 gun owners, fine them $5,000, and put them behind bars. "If this can happen anywhere in America, it can happen everywhere," warns Chris Cox, Executive Director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). "And right now, Barack Obama and his gun control allies in Congress are plotting new ways to bring Connecticut's freedom-crushing policies to every corner of America." Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 06, 2014, 06:49:12 pm http://news.yahoo.com/states-look-gun-seizure-law-mass-killings-152120496.html
States look to gun seizure law after mass killings 7/6/14 HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — As state officials across the country grapple with how to prevent mass killings like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown and near the University of California, Santa Barbara, some are turning to a gun seizure law pioneered in Connecticut 15 years ago. Connecticut's law allows judges to order guns temporarily seized after police present evidence that a person is a danger to themselves or others. A court hearing must be held within 14 days to determine whether to return the guns or authorize the state to hold them for up to a year. The 1999 law, the first of its kind in the country, was in response to the 1998 killings of four managers at the Connecticut Lottery headquarters by a disgruntled employee with a history of psychiatric problems. Indiana is the only other state that has such a law, passed in 2005 after an Indianapolis police officer was shot to death by a mentally ill man. California and New Jersey lawmakers are now considering similar statutes, both proposed in the wake of the killings of six people and wounding of 13 others near the University of California, Santa Barbara by a mentally ill man who had posted threatening videos on YouTube. Michael Lawlor, Connecticut's undersecretary for criminal justice planning and policy, believes the state's gun seizure law could have prevented the killings of 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, if police had been made aware that gunman Adam Lanza had mental health problems and access to his mother's legally owned guns. "That's the kind of situation where you see the red flags and the warning signs are there, you do something about it," Lawlor said. "In many shootings around the country, after the fact it's clear that the warning signs were there." Gun rights advocates oppose gun seizure laws, saying they allow police to take people's firearms based only on allegations and before the gun owners can present their side of the story to a judge. They say they're concerned the laws violate constitutional rights. "The government taking things away from people is never a good thing," said Rich Burgess, president of the gun rights group Connecticut Carry. "They come take your stuff and give you 14 days for a hearing. Would anybody else be OK if they just came and took your car and gave you 14 days for a hearing?" Rachel Baird, a Connecticut lawyer who has represented many gun owners, said one of the biggest problems with the state's law is that police are abusing it. She said she has had eight clients whose guns were seized by police who obtained the required warrants after taking possession of the guns. "It's stretched and abused, and since it's firearms, the courts go along with it," Baird said of the law. But backers of such laws say they can prevent shootings by getting guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed people. "You want to make sure that when people are in crisis ... there is a way to prevent them to get access to firearms," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the nonprofit Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence in Washington, D.C. Connecticut authorities report a large increase in the use of gun seizure warrants involving people deemed dangerous by police over the past several years. Officials aren't exactly sure what caused the increase but believe it's related to numerous highly publicized mass shootings in recent years. Police statewide filed an estimated 183 executed gun seizure warrants with court clerks last year, more than twice the number filed in 2010, according to Connecticut Judicial Branch data. Last year's total also was nearly nine times higher than the annual average in the first five years of the gun seizure law. Connecticut police have seized more than 2,000 guns using the warrants, according to the most recent estimate by state officials, in 2009. Police in South Windsor, about 12 miles northeast of Hartford, say the law was invaluable last year when they seized several guns from the home of a man accused of spray-painting graffiti referencing mass shootings in Newtown and Colorado on the outside of the town's high school. "With all that we see in the news day after day, particular after Newtown, I think departments are more aware of what authority they have ... and they're using the tool (gun seizure warrants) more frequently than in the past," said South Windsor Police Chief Matthew Reed. "We always look at it from the other side. What if we don't seize the guns?" Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 10, 2014, 12:47:51 pm Target's gun ban backfires: Here come the robbers
Major retailer's firearms policy creates danger for customers Within three days of a new policy asking customers not to bring their guns to Target stores, reports have surfaced of armed attacks on customers. Two Target shoppers at two different stores in Georgia have been robbed by armed thugs since the discount retailer announced on July 2, in a letter from its CEO, that it would “respectfully request” that customers leave their guns at home when they visit Target. Spokeswoman Molly Snyder said it was not a ban on guns, just a “request” that the Minneapolis-based retailer hoped its customers would honor. She said no signs would be posted banning guns, nor would any customer legally carrying a gun in Target stores be asked to leave. On the very same day that CEO John Mulligan issued his public statement, a man was robbed at gunpoint in the parking lot of a Target in Gainesville, Georgia. Three days later, on July 5, a woman in the Edgewood area of Atlanta had just parked her Mercedes Benz in a Target parking garage and exited her vehicle when she was approached by a black man who punched her in the head, knocking her to the ground. He took her purse and car keys, then warned her to “stay on the ground or I will f—ing kill you,” according to police reports. He then put her car in reverse and would have run her over if she hadn’t rolled out of the way, she told police. She said she obeyed his commands, according to Decaturish.com. Just days earlier, the Gainesville Police Department arrested three men on charges of robbing a man of his cash at gunpoint in the parking lot of the Target on Shallowford Road in the city about 50 miles northeast of Atlanta. Officers were able to get a vehicle and suspect description, according to police spokesman Cpl. Kevin Holbrook. The alleged robbers were arrested later that same day. The victim, Kyle Bledsoe, reportedly had more than $500 cash on him. Officers confiscated one handgun when they made the arrest, Holbrook said. Jerry Henry, executive director of GeorgiaCarry.org, said he thought Target made a poor decision. “That’s what happens in gun-free zones,” he told WND. “They actually should be called victim-enrichment zones because that’s what they are. If anyone wants to commit a crime with impunity, take your gun where there are no guns. You can do what you want, get in and get out and there’s nobody to stop you. “If you notice where most of the so-called mass shootings are happening, they’re in gun-free zones,” Henry continued. “You don’t see them at gun shows or at gun stores. You don’t see people walk in there and start shooting. They’re not going to do it because they know everybody in there is armed.” Mulligan’s message to Target customers asking them to keep their firearms at home appeared July 2 in the retailer’s online magazine which, as irony would have it, is named “A Bullseye View.” The alleged gunpoint robbery in Gainesville occurred about 6 p.m. on July 2, followed by the Atlanta robbery on July 5. Mulligan said in his letter that the company had “studied the nuances” of the gun-rights issue from both sides and decided that it didn’t want its customers to carry weapons into its stores, “even in communities where it is permitted by law.” Georgia is one of those states where carrying a gun at a retail store is legal for those possessing a concealed-carry permit. Mulligan said this was a complicated issue, but the company’s decision came down to its belief that carrying firearms at Target “creates an environment that is at odds with the family friendly shopping and work experience.” Read the Target CEO’s complete letter asking its customers not to carry. The carefully worded statement stopped short of banning guns. “As you’ve likely seen in the media, there has been a debate about whether guests in communities that permit ‘open carry’ should be allowed to bring firearms into Target stores. Our approach has always been to follow local laws, and of course, we will continue to do so. But starting today we will also respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target – even in communities where it is permitted by law.” Henry, the GeorgiaCarry.org director, said he believes Target issued the “no guns” request in an effort to assuage Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, a group backed by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg that is pushing for stricter gun-control measures in both the public and private sectors. “Moms Demand Action was bombarding them with calls and letters telling them that they needed to change or they were going to leave and go elsewhere (to shop),” Henry said. “They were getting a lot of pressure from Bloomberg’s group, and now they’re going to be pressuring somebody else to make the same kind of statement. This will go on until his money runs out.” Snyder told WND she could not disclose who the company may have consulted with prior to making its decision. “We typically don’t discuss interactions with specific groups or individuals,” she said. “However, what I would say is that we received feedback from our guests who have shared their varied perspectives on this topic.” Henry said his group held a “We beat Bloomberg” party when Georgia’s HB 60 law went into effect July 1 and he told Georgia Carry members, “Now we’re going to celebrate with a big sugary drink,” since “he [Bloomberg] wants to ban those, too!” The former New York mayor infamously led a campaign to restrict the sales of soft drinks there to 16-ounce sizes and smaller. It recently was thrown out by the courts. Target’s new policy follows that of Starbucks and other major retailers that have issued similar policies. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz used the same language in a September 2013 letter to customers in which he made a “respectful request” that they not carry guns in his stores. “Most of them, especially the large companies, say ‘we follow the state law, if you’re allowed to carry you can do so,’” Henry said. “Starbucks started off the policy that Target just adopted, saying we’re not going to ban guns but we request you don’t bring them. Bloomberg’s ladies, the Moms Demand Action, call it a ban. ‘Oh yay, we won, we got bans approved for the stores.’ That’s what they say. But it’s not a ban. They got the companies to issue a letter saying we don’t want you to bring them in here. Target even followed up with a statement saying, ‘This is not a ban, but we just ask you not to bring your guns in here.’” Henry said he believes at least two groups are operating in Georgia with financial backing from Bloomberg. “He’s paying a couple of groups down here. One is Moms Demand Action and the other is Mayors Against Illegal Guns,” he said. Henry said he refers to the latter group as “Illegal Mayors Against Guns” because its members are far more likely to commit a felony than any licensed gun holder in states like Georgia or Texas. “Somebody did the math, and if you are a member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns then you are 82 times more likely to commit a felony than a licensed gun holder in Texas,” he said. “If you Google ‘gun owners against illegal mayors’ you’ll see all those mayors who have been convicted of or arrested (on charges of) felonies.” Target’s no-guns “request” sparked more than 4,800 customer comments on Target’s website. The back-and-forth debate between Second Amendment advocates and gun-control progressives reached a fevered pitch. “Thank you, Target for displaying #gunsense and promoting public safety as a civic duty,” wrote S.K. Boss of Arkansas. “Public safety is removing my ability to defend myself? Are you on drugs?” responded another customer, Bob Jones. Boss then struck back with the comment that only police should be allowed to carry guns in a “civilized” society. “Civilized societies hire police for this purpose (of protecting the public) and don’t rely on random individuals among us,” Boss wrote. “If you are a cop, thanks for taking on that task. We all appreciate the work you do.” Georgia’s new law, known as House Bill 60, went into effect July 1, allowing permit holders to carry in shopping malls, stores, restaurants and government buildings where there is not a security checkpoint. “The timing of our announcement was in no way tied to the new law in Georgia. As our interim CEO John Mulligan noted, this was something the leadership team had been monitoring for some time,” said Snyder. Henry likes to remind skeptics that very few businesses, even those owned by gun-control advocates, will post a sign advertising that guns aren’t allowed. Taco Mac, an Atlanta-based Mexican eatery, did that several years ago and it backfired. “They’d been in business for 29 years and never had a robbery,” Henry said. “After we passed our update to the Georgia carry laws in 2008 allowing us to carry in restaurants that served alcohol, as long as we didn’t consume alcohol, Taco Mac posted a sign, and within nine months they had their first robbery.” It didn’t take that long when Jack in the Box restaurants made a similar demand. In fact, there have been four robbery reports in the few weeks after the change was announced. One incident was in Liberty, Texas. Only a few weeks earlier, a Jack in the Box in northwest Houston was hit. The second in the series also was in Houston, but the first one after company officials announced their changed policy, only about a month ago, was in Tennessee, where a man was shot in the restaurant’s parking lot. The incidents began shortly after an anti-gun group, Moms Demand Action, put pressure on the company to ban guns. Jack in the Box announced the new policy with an explanation: “Creating a warm and inviting environment for all of our guests and employees is a top priority for Jack in the Box. The presence of guns inside a restaurant could create an uncomfortable situation for our guests and employees and lead to unintended consequences. While we respect the rights of all our guests, we would prefer that guests not bring their guns inside our restaurants.” Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/armed-robbers-shopping-for-victims-at-target/#V3PtlzfPxdEMGyQB.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 10, 2014, 12:57:02 pm On a personal note about TARGET stores. I once caught a shop lifter at a TARGET store, he stole a usb drive, ripped it out of its packaging and stuffed it in his pants as i watched. Being who i am, i called him out on it, and harassed him all the way out of the store. I tried to get the actual target personnel to actually do their job and apprehend the thief but, none would do anything about it. They stood there just like sheep watching. After the guy left the store i asked the supervisor who stood their and watched why his people didnt stop the guy, he said it was store policy not to stop a robber. :o
So Target does nothing but approve the sheeple lifestyle of the acceptant victim. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 23, 2014, 05:09:16 pm http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2014/07/22/justice-kennedy-unsure-on-bearing-arms.html
7/23/14 Justice Kennedy ‘Not So Sure’ on Guns The Supreme Court’s swing justice isn’t so sure about the meaning of the Second Amendment. “The Constitution of the United States is a flawed document,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said at a conference of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday. In 2008, he voted in the majority to overturn a ban on handguns, saying the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess certain firearms at home. Previously, the court interpreted the right to bear arms as applying to a “well-regulated militia.” Critics say because the court took centuries to declare an individual right to bear arms, it doesn’t exist. “I’m not so sure” about that argument, Kennedy said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 05, 2014, 07:25:09 pm http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/05/opinion/webster-james-brady-law-guns/index.html
8/5/14 What James Brady did for gun control By Daniel Webster updated 4:03 PM EDT, Tue August 5, 2014 (CNN) -- In 1981, James Brady was shot in the head and gravely wounded in a shooting that also wounded President Reagan -- despite their both being surrounded by plenty of extremely well-trained "good guys with guns." At that time, federal law set conditions, such as a felony conviction or being involuntarily hospitalized for a mental illness, that prohibited a person from possessing firearms. **Yes, don't believe these gun control advocates nowdays when they say "We need to take guns out of the hands of the mentally ill" propaganda - guess what...it's BEEN LAW for a LONG TIME! The 1968 Gun Control Act had established record-keeping requirements and regulated interstate transactions of firearms, but there was no federal law requiring proof from a prospective buyer that he or she was not prohibited from possessing firearms. It was, in essence, an honor system. You could purchase as many firearms and as much ammunition as you liked, as long as you signed a form stating that you didn't meet any of the disqualifying conditions. While James Brady started his long road to recovery from his brain injuries, he and his wife, Sarah, began what has been a three-decade endeavor to strengthen America's gun laws and prevent others from becoming victims of gun violence. The Bradys and the organization they have helped lead have been successful in: --Expanding disqualifiers for firearm possession to include perpetrators of domestic violence --Advancing laws to prevent gun violence at the state level --Litigating legal cases to protect the public from unsafe business practices in the gun industry --Educating the public about how to protect children from being shot But Brady's best-known legacy will be the federal law he championed and that bears his name, the Brady Gun Violence Prevention Act. The Brady Act was a huge leap forward toward fulfilling the objectives of the Gun Control Act of 1968: keeping guns from dangerous people. It required licensed gun dealers to submit information on the identity of prospective gun buyers to the FBI, which could then determine through searches of databases of criminal records whether the purchaser was prohibited. Through this law, millions of prohibited buyers have been identified and prohibited from purchasing firearms from licensed dealers. What impact the Brady Law has had on public safety is debatable and, in my opinion, very difficult to assess. Because some states had background check requirements in place before the Brady Law, one way to estimate the policy's effects is to contrast changes in homicide trends in these states at the time the law was implemented with changes over the same period in states newly implementing background checks for sales by licensed gun dealers. But the accuracy of the estimates depends on having states that are similar except for the policy change or having states with similar crime trends before the law was implemented. If the pre-law trends differ between those sets of states, you must control for those differences. Those conditions haven't been met in studies of the Brady Law. But I believe the Brady Law is the foundation upon which we should build a complete system for vetting all firearms transactions to keep guns away from people identified by laws as being too dangerous to possess them. Some consider background checks for all gun sales a pipe dream, based on the flawed logic that gun laws won't work when criminals don't obey them. This argument ignores the important linkages between legal and illegal gun markets and what research has shown about the ability of sensible regulations to prevent diversions of guns into the illegal market. We can't directly observe a homicide prevented because of background checks, but we can see what happens in their absence. After Missouri repealed its system for vetting all handgun sales through a permit to purchase background check system in 2007, firearm homicide rates increased sharply while rates declined nationally and in states surrounding Missouri. A study that I conducted to assess the effects of this policy change controlled for a host of other factors that might explain Missouri's spike in gun homicides and determined that Missouri's repealed handgun purchase permit law was associated with nearly 50 additional homicides per year. The last 33 years of James Brady's life were marked by courage and perseverance, not only to regain what gun violence had taken from him, but to curb the nation's extraordinary high level of gun violence. He has been an inspiration to many who are committed to completing what he started, so we can have far more effective policies for keeping guns from dangerous people. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 11, 2014, 11:09:04 pm http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_26307683/gun-background-checks-spike-after-legislation-mass-shootings?source=rss
Gun background checks spike after legislation, mass shootings 8/9/14 NEW HAVEN, CONN. >> A tragedy that generated a national debate on gun control would appear to be behind the biggest jump in federally mandated background checks for firearm purchases in two decades. An examination of background checks going back to 1998 shows the numbers consistently peak and drop throughout a calendar year, tied to hunting season, holidays and more recently, panic buying around legislative efforts on gun control. There also are increases in checks in states where mass shootings occur. Each check of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System doesn't necessarily represent a sale of a single gun, because not all buyers pass the screening, but there is a relationship with weapons purchases, according to the FBI. The greatest surge in FBI checks across the country began in November 2012, when President Barack Obama was elected to a second term in office, and hit a then-record monthly high of more than 2 million. But that number was dwarfed when the checks leapt another 39 percent nationwide the next month after 20 first-graders and six educators were slain at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. Over the next few months, the numbers dropped, but remained high as the U.S. Senate attempted to pass legislation to mandate background checks at gun shows where dealers are not federally licensed. According to analysts, the seemingly cyclical spikes in firearm background checks are due to a combination of consumerism and fear that the government will take away weapons or restrict their purchase. "It is clear that there are sharp peaks, especially after elections, and especially elections in which (President Barack) Obama prevailed," said Alfred Blumstein, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University. **But there was NO fear when Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush were in office? With Reagan supporting universal background checks, and the whole gun confiscation fiasco in New Orleans after Katrina udner W. Bush? The FBI conducted more than 186 million background checks between 1998 and May of this year. Of those, the system rejected 1 million requests, usually because the would-be gun buyer had been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison or a misdemeanor punishable by more than two years. That jumps to closer to 2 million when rejections by the states are factored in, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The highest number of FBI background checks in one day took place on Dec. 21, 2012, one week after the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, when the federal government reviewed more than 177,000 background checks. There were 21,537 background checks in New Mexico in December 2012, the highest ever. After the Newtown shootings, there was a national discussion of changes around gun control, which opponents saw as a threat to the Second Amendment. Ultimately, a number of states tightened access to firearms, while others made it easier to obtain them. This year, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence said it is tracking more than 1,300 firearms bills in state legislatures, about half of which would strengthen firearms laws and half weaken them. The center ranks New Mexico 38th in the nation in terms of how strict its gun laws are. California and Connecticut have the strictest laws, according to the center. The only gun restriction New Mexico legislators considered this year was whether to ban guns in the Roundhouse. The measure failed in the Senate Rules Committee before reaching the full assembly. In 2013, legislators proposed a law requiring background checks on sales of all guns at gun shows and another prohibiting felons from receiving, transporting or possessing firearms. Neither made it to both chambers. Last year, a vote in the U.S. Senate fell six votes short of passing a bill to expand background checks to cover firearms sales at gun shows and over the Internet. It would have exempted private sales between friends and acquaintances, but a heavy campaign by the National Rifle Association spreading incorrect information that it would criminalize these actions led to its defeat. Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the NRA, said the organization continues to reject applying the background checks to gun shows. **And remember how Rick Warren said his son(who committed suicide last year) bought an unregistered gun illegally over the internet. IF he did buy a firearm over the internet, he did so LEGALLY. This isn't the first time this propaganda was put out - don't ever fall for this! He said people found to be lying about their criminal backgrounds or other impediments to buying firearms are not punished. "Where are the repercussions?" he asked. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System began in late 1998, a few months before the horrific shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado. In the ensuing 16 years, with the exception of Newtown, mass killings have not set off significant, nationwide spikes in the background checks. In individual states, however, where tragedy struck, there would be an increase in the background checks that would be required to buy a gun. In Colorado, there were about 23,000 background checks in December 1998, but they nearly doubled to about 45,000 by a year later, after the Columbine killings. But the state's one-month record came last year after Gov. John Hickenlooper signed legislation that required universal background checks on gun purchases and transfers; limited most ammunition magazines to 15 rounds and stipulated that buyers pay for those background checks. The national debate on background checks is stalled at the moment. "I think we are stuck right now on expanding the number of sales subject to background checks," said U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who along with Connecticut's senior senator, U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, has led the effort to amend the federal background checks. In the meantime, Murphy said there are still ways to make it a better system. He suggested the government provide more law enforcement resources to upload mental health data and also add additional violent crimes, such as temporary domestic violence restraining orders, that would stop the sale of a firearm to an individual. This is now covered by state law, but not federal law. The next arena will be the voting booth, with two state senators in Colorado already losing recall elections with a third resigning in light of the gun legislation he voted for. How gun restrictions will play out in this year's midterm elections remains to be seen. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 26, 2014, 08:40:18 pm http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/26/the-nra-pissed-off-the-wrong-nerd-genius.html
8/26/14 The NRA Pissed Off the Wrong Nerd Genius Billionaire Michael Bloomberg already had the gun lobby in his sights. Now Bill Gates is donating $1 million for universal background checks—and there’s more where that came from. Somewhere in a large glass tower in Northern Virginia, there’s a guy who runs guns with a French name having a bad day. With good reason. It was reported Monday that Bill Gates, Microsoft co-founder and incredibly wealthy guy, and with his wife, Melinda, have given $1 million to Initiative 594 in Washington state. The ballot initiative, if passed by voters on November 4 (and it currently enjoys overwhelming support), will require universal background checks for all firearm purchases in the state. Gates is only the latest Washington billionaire to give to the effort, with original Amazon investor Nick Hanauer providing crucial early funding, and more recently upping his overall donation to $1.4 million. Additionally, Gates’s Microsoft co-founder, Paul Allen, has provided $500,000 for the cause. But Gates’s fame brings more attention and further legitimizes the initiative in a way that almost nobody else could. Once the Gates Foundation made it a priority to combat malaria around the world in 2000, it brought down deaths due to the insect-borne disease by 20 percent in 11 years, saving the lives of 1 million African children in the process. Gates has the ability to grab headlines and make an issue go viral with the constant media coverage he receives, and the financial ability, if he wins, to fund similar efforts around the country. His involvement could be the answer to the public health crisis that makes American children 93 percent of those murdered in the 26 high-income countries around the world. Meanwhile, the NRA has…Chuck Norris, doing its “Trigger The Vote” Campaign. An actor, in the sense that he showed up in films, who was last seen round-housing Vietnamese extras in B-movies in the ’80s, back when he was only pushing 50. In more recent times, the more Methuselah-esque-appearing Norris has spent his time warning us of 1,000 years of darkness if President Obama is reelected. (He was. Boo!) That, in short, is why the guy with the French-sounding name, National Rifle Association head honcho Wayne LaPierre, is probably somewhere drowning his sorrows in his Pernod. Because Gates’ involvement in this issue is just about the last thing LaPierre needs. Already, the NRA has shown its disdain for anyone with the guts and resources to take on its political cartel of legally bribed legislators around the country. It was used to having the field to itself financially in the 2000s, until along came New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. After seeing his constituents and police force victimized by lax gun laws out of state, lobbied for by the NRA, he decided it was time to do something. The now former mayor’s activism had led to the ire of LaPierre & Company, who’ve just released a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign blasting Bloomberg, replete with his supposed sneering at “flyover country” in between the coasts. Which LaPierre clearly doesn’t do while receiving his million-dollar-plus compensation in the wealthy Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C. Ironically, it was in Virginia where Bloomberg’s organization, Everytown for Gun Safety, had one of its biggest victories, when it elected a governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general in 2013. None of whom thought a 12-year old should be able to open-carry an Uzi in St. Patrick’s Cathedral, because of, you know, freedom. Suddenly those who agree with the 90 percent of the country who support universal background checks had access to similar, if not greater, financial resources than those who pledged their allegiance to an arms dealer-funded front group. Bloomberg is worth $33 billion, but if that’s not enough, Gates is worth well over two times that amount. Who knows, with that kind of dough, maybe even measures that “only” enjoy 56 percent support like bans on assault weapons and/or high-capacity magazines could pass via direct voting by uncorrupted American citizens. Or perhaps state legislators and members of Congress who bend easily to the will of these Lords of War could be swapped out for those who live in a closer neighborhood to the best interests of the American populace. Likely the NRA will try to do to Gates what it has attempted to do to Bloomberg for a few years now, and seek to make this fight about him and not its right-wing radicalism in the service of avarice. He’s a billionaire trying to influence our political process, after all, unlike Manhattan resident David Koch, who along with his brother Charles has polluted our political process to no end, including funding the NRA. Sure, in an ideal world big money wouldn’t play such an outsize role in our elections, such as this hugely important ballot initiative in Washington state. But that’s not what the NRA wants. It just wants its big money still to be all that decides the outcome, and it isn’t. Which is why Wayne LaPierre’s having a bad day. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 12, 2014, 02:23:23 pm http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/11/One-Percenters-Gun-Control-Initiative-Means-Handgun-Registration-For-Washington-State
9/11/14 One-Percenters' Gun Control Would Mean 'Handgun Registration' for Washington State Initiative-594, the universal background check initiative being bankrolled by millionaires and billionaires in Washington state, will lead to "universal handgun registration" if passed. Page 2 of the 18-page initiative opens the door to such registration by "extending the requirement for a background check to apply to all gun sales and transfers within the state." This means record keeping, and record keeping means the formation of a database to compile the location of all known guns and the names of all known gun owners. The NRA reports: "Every time a handgun is transferred, the person receiving the handgun will have their name added to the government database being maintained by the state Department of Licensing." The text of I-594 lists slight exceptions to the background check requirements, but they are often tedious. For example, "the temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death" is allowable without a check. But the transfer can only be done without paperwork granting that "it only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent immanent death or great bodily harm." If the friend to whom the gun was loaned wishes to hold on to it beyond the immediate threat period then he or she, as well as the gun owner, will have to find a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder and undergo a background check to transfer the gun. This, in turn, will add a new name to the gun owner database. When Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) tried unsuccessfully to push universal background checks at the federal level in 2013, Breitbart News argued then that such checks were unenforceable without the creation of a gun registry. What was true for such legislation in Washington, D.C. is also true for I-594 in Washington state. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 14, 2014, 09:39:30 pm http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/09/charles-krauthammer-assault-weapon-ban.html
9/14/14 Charles Krauthammer, the Assault Weapon Ban, and Shannon Watts On April 5th, 1996, Charles Krauthammer gave his reasons for supporting the 1994 Clinton Assault Weapon Ban. The column was called "Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet." in the Washington Post. Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquillity of the kind enjoyed in sister democracies like Canada and Britain. Given the frontier history and individualist ideology of the United States, however, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically. It will probably take one, maybe two generations. It might be 50 years before the United States gets to where Britain is today. Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic -- purely symbolic -- move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation. Its purpose is to spark debate, highlight the issue, make the case that the arms race between criminals and citizens is as dangerous as it is pointless. De-escalation begins with a change in mentality. And that change in mentality starts with the symbolic yielding of certain types of weapons. The real steps, like the banning of handguns, will never occur unless this one is taken first, and even then not for decades. The column came to mind because even the Bloomberg funded Moms Demand Aciton has decided to step away from the idiotic "Assault Weapon Ban" for much the same reasons that Charles Krauthammer mentioned: While many gun control groups still officially support the assault weapons ban — "we haven't abandoned the issue," as Watts said — they're no longer actively fighting for it. Krauthammer has changed his thought a little bit since then. This is from his column "The roots of mass murder" published in December of 2012: I have no problem in principle with gun control. Congress enacted (and I supported) an assault weapons ban in 1994. The problem was: It didn’t work. (So concluded a University of Pennsylvania study commissioned by the Justice Department.) The reason is simple. Unless you are prepared to confiscate all existing firearms, disarm the citizenry and repeal the Second Amendment, it’s almost impossible to craft a law that will be effective. But Charles has never really explained why he thinks that gun bans are necessary for domestic tranquility. They have never reduced the homicide rate anywhere else. The homicide rate in England increased with increasing gun control, including homicide with guns. Nowhere have gun bans been shown to decrease homicide rates. The closest place is Australia, where a massive, intrusive, gun control scheme was pushed onto the public in a rush after a mass shooting in 1996. The legislation had been planned in advance, just waiting for the right trigger. The only problem is that academics agree: the legislation had no effect on Australia's homicide rate, which was already dropping before the ban. An excellent counterexample is Switzerland, which had far less gun control than the United States for decades, up until 1998. Facing immense pressure from the European Union to impose restrictive gun laws, Switizerland implemented gun control that brought it close to the United States in some areas, more restrictive in some ways, less restrictive in others. Yet Switzerland has always had one of the lowest homicide rates in Europe. The evidence that restricting guns lowers crime simply does not exist. So why does Charles Krauthammer think it is necessary? Does his idea of "domestic tranquility" mean something other than crime reduction? I have one explanation. It is because citizen disarmament has become an article of "progressive" faith, not logic or reason. Perhaps part of that is simply that "progressivism" is built on the idea of a powerful state protecting and providing for its citizens. If the state is your god, limits on it, such as the second amendment, are intrinsically offensive. But limits on state power have proven to be necessary everywhere. Even socialistic European nations have found that they must limit state power. All of them have far lower corporate tax rates than the United States, for example. Unlimited state power leads to disasters such as the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, North Korea, and most recently, Venezuela. Expecting a "world government" to be an exception to the abuse of state power is the worst kind of pollyannism. I would like to have Charles Krauthammer explain what "domestic tranquility" would be enhanced by a gun ban. Perhaps he will, some day. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 15, 2014, 07:09:02 pm http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/09/12/finally-waving-the-white-flag-on-the-assault-weapons-ban/
9/12/14 Finally Waving the White Flag on the Assault Weapons Ban My Comment: Not really... Twenty years after the since-expired assault weapons ban passed Congress, Washington’s leading liberal think says it’s no longer an idea worth pursuing. The Center for American Progress is waving a white flag on banning assault weapons in a study out Friday titled “Assault Weapons Revisited.” CAP authors Arkadi Gerney and Chelsea Parsons argue that gun control advocates focus their energies primarily on expanding background checks and firearms licensing laws instead of pushing to prohibit assault weapons like the AR-15 rifle. “The answer is not that assault weapons aren’t dangerous and people having access to them is a good thing,” Mr. Gerney said in an interview this week. “There are other things that we can do to lessen the risks of assault weapons short of banning them. … When you’re making policy, it’s always a mix of what’s going to have a biggest positive impact and what is practical and politically possible.” Banning assault weapons, which Congress did for a decade as part of the 1994 crime bill, was a centerpiece of the policy prescriptions President Barack Obama sought in the wake of the December 2012 school massacre at Newtown, Conn. Mr. Obama also sought to implement universal background checks for gun purchases, ban high-capacity ammunition magazines and restrict on gun trafficking. Only background checks received a serious hearing in Congress – only 40 senators voted for an assault weapons ban. Background checks fell five votes short. The 1994 assault weapons ban expired in 2004 when Congress did not reauthorize it. Mr. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, when they addressed the issue, spoke passionately about the need to ban the sort of weapon used during the Newtown shooting. “We should restore the ban on military-style assault weapons and a 10-round limit for magazines,” Mr. Obama said during a February 2013 speech in Minneapolis. “Weapons of war have no place on our streets or in our schools or threatening our law enforcement officers. Our law enforcement officers should never be out-gunned on the streets.” But advocates who worked with the White House said even that push was designed as a threat to force negotiations on expanding background checks, the real gun control goal. It didn’t work. “On this larger question of assault weapons, let’s take a fresh look and look at a combination of things we can do short of a ban that would make it much harder for criminals and mentally ill to acquire guns,” Mr. Gerney said. While the White House has done virtually nothing to focus attention on gun violence In the 17 months since the failed background checks vote, gun control advocacy groups have sought to reframe their focus away from Washington. Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, a grass-roots organization funded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, now spends its time pressuring corporate entities to forbid the open carrying of guns in their establishments. Mr. Bloomberg has pledged to spend $50 million to support friendly candidates in the 2014 election, but evidence of his groups backing House and Senate candidates has yet to emerge. Americans for Responsible Solutions, the group launched by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, in June announced it would back a handful of incumbents who support gun control efforts. They are airing advertisements to back Rep. Ron Barber, an Arizona Democrat who was shot alongside Ms. Giffords and won her seat when she resigned. The CAP report makes official what advocates have aimed for since the post-Newtown focus landed on background checks. A ProPublica report this week quoted a series of advocates saying they officially support an assault weapons ban but have abandoned the fight for it. “We’ve very much changed our strategy to focus on public safety measures that will save the most lives,” Shannon Watts, the founder of Mr. Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action, told ProPublica. Instead, CAP makes an argument for six policy prescriptions that are equally unlikely to receive a hearing in a Congress with zero appetite for any gun restrictions: implement background checks for all gun sales, force dealers to report to the federal government multiple sales of long guns, expand the prohibition on interstate handgun sales to include shotguns and rifles, forbid the use or possession of machine guns by people younger than 16, and require licenses and permits to possess an assault rifle or manufacture guns using 3D printers. None of those proposals are likely to get a serious hearing with the current Congress. The National Rifle Association successfully fought against the post-Newtown proposals and stands opposed to any new federal restrictions on gun ownership or licensing of gun owners. “You want to be ready for when there is an opportunity to move federal legislation,” Mr. Gerney said. “Once in a while you have to take the long view and take a look at what are the problems we’re facing, what are the set of policy solutions? Do the solutions match the problem and have we taken a fresh look at the problem?” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 17, 2014, 09:53:32 am 9/16/14
Obama administration forcing new gun buyers to declare race, ethnicity ATF policy irks dealers, risks privacy intrusion, racial profiling: critics The Obama administration quietly has been forcing new gun buyers to declare their race and ethnicity, a policy change that critics say provides little law enforcement value while creating the risk of privacy intrusions and racial profiling. With little fanfare, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in 2012 amended its Form 4473 — the transactional record the government requires gun purchasers and sellers to fill out when buying a firearm — to identify buyers as either Hispanic, Latino or not. Then a buyer must check his or her race: Indian, Asian, black, Pacific Islander or white. The amendment is causing a headache for gun retailers, as each box needs to be checked off or else it’s an ATF violation — severe enough for the government to shut a business down. Many times people skip over the Hispanic/Latino box and only check their race, or vice versa — both of which are federal errors that can be held against the dealer. Requiring the race and ethnic information of gun buyers is not required by federal law and provides little law enforcement value, legal experts say. And gun industry officials worry about how the information is being used and whether it constitutes an unnecessary intrusion on privacy. “This issue concerns me deeply because, first, it’s offensive, and, secondly, there’s no need for it,” said Evan Nappen, a private practice firearms lawyer in New Jersey. “If there’s no need for an amendment, then there’s usually a political reason for the change. What this indicates is it was done for political reasons, not law enforcement reasons.” ATF said the change came about because it needed to update its forms to comply with an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reporting standard put into effect during the Clinton administration. The ATF declined to comment on why race and ethnicity information are needed in the first place or what they are used for. On its prior 4473 forms, the bureau had been collecting race data. “OMB’s race and ethnicity standards require agencies to ask both race and ethnicity in a specific manner (as done on [Form 4473]), and agencies may not ask for one without asking for the other,” wrote Elizabeth Gosselin, a spokeswoman for the ATF, in an emailed response to The Washington Times. She did not say why the agency suddenly made the change in response to a rule that was more than a decade old. For ATF to ask for a purchaser’s race and ethnicity is not specifically authorized under federal statute, and since a government-issued photo ID — like a driver’s license — and a background check are already required by law to purchase a gun, the ethnicity/race boxes aren’t there for identification reasons, Mr. Nappen said. “There is nothing [in ATF or OMB’s website links addressing the change in policy] that supports the requirement that ATF collect race-based information. The OMB guidance merely describes what categories of race should look like if information is collected,” Laura Murphy, the American Civil Liberties Union director for legislative affairs in Washington, said in an emailed statement. In addition, Mrs. Murphy notes, the OMB guidance was supposed to be implemented by 2003; there’s no information given why ATF decided to make this change almost a decade later, she said. “If there is a civil rights enforcement reason for the ATF to collect this data, I have not heard that explanation from ATF or any other federal agency,” said Mrs. Murphy. Both the NAACP and the National Council of La Raza — the nation’s largest national Hispanic civil rights group — declined comment. Access to the form The 4473 form is supposed to be kept in a gun retailer’s possession at all times — allowing ATF agents to inspect the form only during the course of a criminal investigation or during a random audit of the dealer. The form is to be kept out of the hands of the government, hence the distinction between “sales/transaction form” and “registration form.” But that isn’t always the case, gun rights advocates say. “We’ve been contacted by several dealers saying ATF is or has been making wholesale copies of their 4473 forms, and it’s just not legal,” said Erich Pratt, spokesman for Gun Owners of America, a gun advocacy group. “If this is what they’re doing somewhat out in the open, what’s going on behind closed doors? Are these names and demographic information getting phoned [in and] punched into a government computer? Do they ever come out?” Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/16/obama-white-house-forcing-new-gun-buyers-to-declar/#ixzz3Damt5X85 Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter Title: Australia, ISIS And The Role Of Guns Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 19, 2014, 08:59:12 pm http://www.captainsjournal.com/2014/09/18/australia-isis-and-the-role-of-guns/
9/18/14 Australia, ISIS And The Role Of Guns Fox News: Australian counterterrorism forces detained 15 people Thursday in a series of suburban raids after receiving intelligence that the Islamic State militant group was planning public beheadings in two Australian cities to demonstrate its reach. About 800 federal and state police officers raided more than a dozen properties across 12 Sydney suburbs as part of the operation — the largest in Australian history, Australian Federal Police Deputy Commissioner Andrew Colvin told the Associated Press. A sword was removed as part of evidence at one of the homes. Separate raids in the eastern cities of Brisbane and Logan were also conducted. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported that the plan involved kidnapping randomly selected members of the public off the streets in Sydney and Brisbane, beheading them on camera, and releasing the recordings through Islamic State’s propaganda arm in the Middle East. [ ... ] A second man was charged Thursday night in connection with the raids. The 24-year-old, who police didn’t name, was charged with possessing ammunition without license and unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon. He was released on bail and ordered to appear in court next week. Most readers probably pondered how ISIS was able to infiltrate a country and the awful acts they were prepared to perpetrate. I didn’t. My thoughts ran immediately to the fact that at least one of the individuals had a “prohibited” weapon and ammunition. As with all gun control, law abiding citizens are unarmed and unprotected, while the criminals have their weapons. Australia has some of the most restrictive gun control laws on earth. We’ve discussed this before. An Australian farmer lost his fight to obtain a handgun to shoot feral hogs because he couldn’t satisfy the woman heading the “administrative tribunal” that he really needed the gun. The response to the ISIS members in Australia points out several important things. First of all, gun control doesn’t apply to those in charge. Law enforcement will always have their weapons. Second, when law enforcement acts, they do so in order to secure the hive, or the collective. Their concern isn’t and wasn’t for any particular individual who may have been (or will be) targeted by ISIS, because if it was, they would allow people to be armed for purposes of self defense. But actions directed against the collective is a threat to their command and control, and will not be allowed. So do the ordinary people feel threatened? Never before have I felt so naked. Now more than ever, I wish I was armed. And I’m not alone. Any and all home-grown Islamic terrorism should be able, if need be, to be met by a well-armed civilian militia. The United Kingdom has had two beheadings of members of the public in the last two years, with neither police nor civilians able to prevent it. It has prohibitive gun laws. With news of the ISIS plot to randomly abduct members of the Australian public and behead them, Australian sentiment on guns is dramatically shifting. It appears Australians are finally understanding the importance of gun ownership and craving it at a time when the world is increasingly unsafe. “I’ll tell you this point blank: I’d feel safer in a country where I was legally allowed to carry around a firearm,” says J. Coughran, 30, a businessman. According to Coughran, media coverage of Islamic State is fueling the change in heart. “This ISIS stuff is seeing quite a few people changing their opinions.. one of my mates told me today- he’s coming around on the gun issue. He’s 68 years old, been against guns his whole life- now he’s turning around because of these savages,” he said. We’ll see what comes of this. But time is short. For Australia it may be ISIS or criminal gangs which have become more prominent in Australia lately. With America the problems run deeper, with a porous Southern border and criminal cartel gangs ravaging country from the border and on up to large cities like Chicago. Self defense is a luxury when times are safe. When times become hard, the giggling and jokes go away, and people begin to think grown up thoughts. Those who want to continue to think as children pretend that the police will take care of them. Adults know better. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 19, 2014, 09:27:11 pm Prosecutors From Across the Country Form “Anti Gun Violence Coalition”
September 19 2014 by Dan Cannon http://gunssavelives.net/blog/prosecutors-from-across-the-country-form-anti-gun-violence-coalition/ Prosecutors across the nation have formed a coalition which they say is meant to reduce “gun violence”. The prosecutors from Manhattan, Brooklyn, Los Angeles, Seattle, Miami, Houston and Milwaukee will join together to cut down on gang violence using guns, domestic violence involving firearms and the mentally ill accessing firearms. According to a press release put out by the group today, In a groundbreaking effort to combat gun violence, 23 prosecutors representing major jurisdictions throughout the United States today announced the formation of PROSECUTORS AGAINST GUN VIOLENCE. PAGV, an independent, non-partisan coalition founded and co-chaired by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. and Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, will identify and promote prosecutorial and policy solutions to the national public health and safety crisis of gun violence. PAGV also announced that it will convene the first-ever national prosecutorial summit on gun violence prevention in Atlanta on October 21st and 22nd, focusing on best prosecutorial practices, gang violence reduction, illegal weapons trafficking, the nexus between domestic violence and gun violence, the link between mental health issues and gun violence, and other initiatives. PAGV will announce additional summit details shortly. “For prosecutors, gun violence is not a partisan issue,” said District Attorney Vance. “It’s a public health and safety crisis that claims lives and destabilizes communities in every jurisdiction in America. By coming together to share intelligence and advocate for pragmatic, non-partisan solutions, law enforcement officials can achieve lasting progress on gun violence.” “Together, prosecutors across our nation can make a major impact on the gun violence afflicting our communities,” said City Attorney Feuer. “Our members will draw from our colleagues’ most effective strategies and join forces to advance policies that can save lives. Prosecutors have expertise and credibility that are hard to dismiss.” The growing coalition includes prosecutors from Atlanta, Boston, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Charlotte, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Manhattan, Miami, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Portland, Queens, San Antonio, San Francisco, Seattle and Staten Island.’ While reducing violent crime is almost certainly the goal of every prosecutor in this country, why do I get the feeling that a new coalition, announced yesterday, to combat “gun violence” is more about gun control and less about crime prevention? Is it because this idea sounds a lot like Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns? Or is it because most of the prosecutors involved are from more liberal cities? Maybe a little more research into why this coalition was formed and who is behind it is in order… Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 24, 2014, 09:41:25 pm http://news.yahoo.com/police-3-people-dead-shooting-ups-facility-152157320.html
Pastor: UPS gunman was 'troubled' over work 9/23/14 BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) — The man who killed two former co-workers and then himself at a UPS shipping center Tuesday had told some people that he was having problems at work but never suggested the situation might turn violent, his pastor said. Birmingham police late Tuesday identified the shooter as 45-year-old Kerry Joe Tesney of suburban Trussville. They did not release the slain people's names but said they were part of management. They are investigating as a double homicide and suicide. Tesney and his wife have two children, and they've been members at NorthPark Baptist Church since 2003, said the church's pastor, Bill Wilks. Wilks described Tesney as being "troubled" over his work and financial situation. "I think it's been an ongoing situation," Wilks said. "In his own spirit he's been troubled, and he's asked for prayer about that." **Uhm...these so-called "pastors" have NO business going to the public cameras and spilling out all of their pews' dirty laundry, whether they're alive or not! Proverbs 11:13 A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter. Tesney and his wife, Melissa, are listed as distributors for Advocare, a multi-level marketing company that sells health and fitness products. They have a website advertising the business that says: "Just tell us your needs, your dreams your desires ... and we'll make it happen!" UPS spokesman Steve Gaut would not say what Tesney's job duties had been before his firing was finalized Monday. Police said Tesney had gotten that final notice in the mail. Court records showed a Birmingham business sued Tesney and UPS in 2010 claiming he had wrongly picked up a $4,000 radiator for shipment either intentionally or by mistake. The lawsuit went on for years before a judge ruled in favor of Tesney and the shipping company exactly one year ago — Sept. 23, 2013. However, it was not immediately clear why Tesney had been fired or whether that lawsuit may have played a role. The UPS warehouse, a light brown building sitting on a hill with company logos on the front and side, is used to sort packages and send them out on trucks. About 80 drivers had already left on their routes, and a small number remained when the shooter drove up in a private vehicle Tuesday morning and walked inside through a truck dock door in the back of the building, Gaut said. The building has a parking lot surrounded by barbed wire. The man was wearing a UPS uniform and opened fire either in or near some offices inside the warehouse in an industrial area just north of the Birmingham airport, Birmingham Police Chief A.C. Roper told reporters. The gunman had apparently shot himself by the time officers got inside the warehouse, Roper said. No one else was hurt. Employees who were at the warehouse when the shooting happened were being taken to another location so that they could be interviewed by investigators and provided with counseling, Roper said. Late Tuesday morning, a long line of police cars with their lights flashing left the area as part of a motorcade with a white school bus. Also, a wrecker with a police escort left the scene towing a dark red Honda SUV. Vonderrick Rogers lives on the same street as the UPS facility and said he drove past the building shortly after it happened. There were already 10 to 15 police officers on the scene with more arriving, he said. "Cops were jittering and running around like they were ready to go grab somebody," he said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 01:45:51 am http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/fbi-releases-report-examining-mass-shootings
FBI releases report examining mass shootings 9/25/14 WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of shootings in which a gunman wounds or kills multiple people has increased dramatically in recent years, with the majority of attacks in the last decade occurring at a business or a school, according to an FBI report released Wednesday. The study focused on 160 "active shooter incidents" between 2000 and 2013. Those are typically defined as cases in which a gunman in an attack shoots or attempts to shoot multiple people in a populated area. The goal of the report, which excluded shootings that are gang and drug related, was to identify common themes and to help local law enforcement prepare for or respond to similar killings in the future, law enforcement officials said. "These incidents, the large majority of them, are over in minutes. So it's going to have to be a teaching and training of the best tactics, techniques and procedures to our state and local partners," said James F. Yacone, an FBI assistant director who oversees crisis response and was involved in the report. According to the report, an average of six shootings occurred in the first seven years that were studied. That average rose to more than 16 shootings per year in the past seven years of the study. That period included the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as last year's massacre at the Washington Navy Yard in which a gunman killed 12 people before dying in a police shootout. The majority of the shootings occurred either at a business or a school, university or other education facility, according to the study, conducted in conjunction with Texas State University. Other shootings have occurred in open spaces, on military properties, houses of worship and health care facilities. A total of more than 1,000 people were either killed or wounded in the shootings. In about one-quarter of the cases, the shooter committed suicide before the police arrived. The gunman acted alone in all but two of the cases. Not all of the cases studied involved deaths or even injuries. In one 2006 case in Joplin, Missouri, a 13-year-old boy brought a rifle and handgun into a middle school, but his rifle jammed after he fired one shot. The principal then escorted the boy out of school and turned him over to the police. Law enforcement officials who specialize in behavioral analysis say the motives of gunmen vary but many have a real, or perceived, personally held grievance that they feel mandates an act of violence. Though it's hard to say why the number of shootings has increased, officials say they believe many shooters are inspired by past killings and the resulting notoriety. "The copycat phenomenon is real," said Andre Simons of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit. "As more and more notable and tragic events occur, we think we're seeing more compromised, marginalized individuals who are seeking inspiration from those past attacks. Beyond studying the shootings, the FBI has promoted better training for local law enforcement, invariably the first responders. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 30, 2014, 04:02:26 pm http://www.nationalreview.com/node/389099/print
September 29, 2014 3:38 PM How the Right Could Lose Its Way on Guns “Bring your gun to work” laws and their ilk are a perversion of the principles that got us here. By Charles C. W. Cooke In Oklahoma City last week, a business owner and reserve deputy sheriff named Mark Vaughan shot and injured a man who had beheaded one of his employees and, by all accounts, was in the process of attempting to decapitate another. In doing so, a spokesman for the police told reporters, Vaughan had likely saved the lives of “untold others” and he deserved to be treated as a “hero.” Almost universally, local law enforcement concurred. “The incident was not going to stop if he didn’t stop it,” Sergeant Jeremy Lewis explained to the Associated Press. “It could,” he suggested darkly, “have got a lot worse.” Across the country, advocates of the right to keep and bear arms quickly picked up on the case, contending emphatically that the incident illustrated the broader case for the effectiveness of concealed carry and, more specifically, that it demonstrated the need for employers to permit firearms in the workplace. “In some parts of the US,” Patrik Jonsson noted in the Christian Science Monitor, Vaughan “could have faced employer sanctions for bringing a gun to his job.” Not, though, in Oklahoma, which state “is a pioneer in so-called ‘bring your gun to work’ laws that have spread to 22 other states, mostly in the South and Midwest.” In most of those states, Jonsson reports, such laws are reserved to the parking lot. Others, however, “extend that protection into the workplace,” among them Oklahoma. This, the Monitor proposes, raises a question: “Will jihad-style attack boost ‘bring gun to work’ laws?” The National Rifle Association certainly hopes so, the outfit, per Jonsson, having recently “put its considerable clout behind ‘guns at work’ proposals, to the point where the organization has attacked politicians that are usually in good standing with the group for heeding corporate concerns about guns at work.” As a matter of personal preference, I would certainly encourage private companies to allow their employees to bring their firearms to work, and, as a matter of taste, I would prefer it if those who have been discovered violating company policy were treated gently — especially if they were forced to break the rules in self-defense. But, unless one is to wholly rewrite the nature of American constitutional government, these decisions must be reserved to the private sector, and not to local voters or representatives. Like all of the provisions within the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment serves as a check on government and on government alone. It does not apply to Walmart or to FedEx or to Joe’s Highway Diner. When the NRA gripes that some politicians are “heeding corporate concerns” over the predilections of gun owners, what it is really saying is that those politicians are respecting property rights and refusing to get involved where they are not welcome. At what point, one wonders, did that become undesirable to liberty-loving people? On the campaign trail and in private, conservatives invariably profess enthusiasm for at-will employment, for limited regulation, for free contracts between employers and employees, for the right of businesses to decide with whom they wish to associate, and for legal regimes that privilege local knowledge over centralized edict. Ostensibly at least, conservatives do not wish the state to instruct private firms what their opening hours must be, how much they are required to pay their staff, and what sort of health insurance they are bound to provide. Such opposition is rooted in the Right’s belief about the practical effects of these policies, certainly. But it is also grounded in its view of the role of state, which is to be limited to securing liberty and to creating a framework within which markets can flourish. Are we to conclude now that these ideals do not apply when it comes to the question of guns? And if not, what can explain red-state support for preemption? Distressingly, the preemptive “guns at work” provisions that are sweeping the middle of the country are not the only hypocritical intrusions that the Right has championed of late. In Florida earlier this year, Republican majorities in both houses passed an NRA-backed bill that prohibited private insurers “from denying coverage or increasing rates based on customers owning guns or ammunition.” Demonstrating a comprehensive inability to grasp the nature of individual rights, state representative Matt Gaetz told the Tampa Bay Tribune in April that “Floridians have a constitutional right to bear arms,” and that, in consequence, “even one case of insurers taking action because of gun ownership is ‘too much.’” “How much discrimination based on the exercise of a constitutional right is tolerable?” Gaetz asked. Oh dear. Per the Tribune, the bill was designed to apply to property and automobile insurers and add language to part of state law that deals with “unfair discrimination.” As an example, the bill would seek to block insurers from refusing to issue policies because of customers’ lawful ownership or possession of firearms. Similarly, it would bar them from charging “unfairly discriminatory” rates based on gun ownership or possession. Shamefully, Republican governor Rick Scott signed the measure into law. There is, let us be clear, nothing “conservative” about this idea, which has at its root the dangerous presumption that Americans are not truly able to enjoy their rights unless they are protected from the consequences of their exercise. Contrary to their architects’ exhortations, moreover, such regulations do nothing whatsoever to expand the right to keep and bear arms. Indeed, they have nothing to do with “rights” at all. “Insurance,” per Investopedia, is “a form of risk management in which the insured transfers the cost of potential loss to another entity in exchange for monetary compensation known as the premium.” Depending as they do on the nature of the risk that that the provider is being asked to mitigate, those premiums will vary wildly, Life-insurance coverage for a relatively sedentary writer such as myself will, naturally, cost less than life insurance would have cost for Evel Knievel. Auto insurance for a 23-year-old male with a Ferrari and two DUIs will be more costly than it will for a well-behaved 55-year-old woman who drives a Toyota Camry. It’s no different for firearms, and nor is there a case for making it so. If the actuarial evidence reveals that homes with firearms are riskier than homes without, premiums paid by gun owners should reflect that fact. The Bill of Rights exists to protects the citizenry’s capacity to act without government sanction. It does not guarantee immunity from reality. Which is to say that, whatever weasel words they might marshal to their cause, Republicans in the Florida legislature did not protect gun owners at all. Instead, they instructed private insurance companies to ignore any increased risks that they were taking on, thereby making it illegal for those companies to cover their costs. The effect of this was to privilege one set of citizens over another and, by pushing the costs onto everybody in the state, to transmute a private choice into a public liability. One wonders how many of those championing the bill recognize that, by forcing insurers to ignore their data in the name of suspect social engineering, they have effectively instituted Obamacare for weapons. This, suffice it to say, is not “liberty”; it’s cronyism. The notion that there is a significant difference between government force and private choice is a cornerstone of American liberty. Much to the irritation of reformers and meddlers alike, a “right” in the United States is a cudgel that can be used against the state, not by it. That one has a right to privacy does not imply that Washington must provide one with a padlock. Over the past two decades, the National Rifle Association and the Republican party have won a series of spectacular Second Amendment gains, rolling back regulations, reaffirming rights, and removing the tentacles of the state from an area in which they do not belong. This renewal has been electric to watch, but there will be no excuse if these victories provoke a perversion, by which “leave us alone” is transformed by routine success into “do as we wish.” The Right’s attitude toward firearms can serve as a helpful illustration of its stance toward liberty writ large. If it becomes aggressive in victory, it will squander a vital opportunity and lose its soul in the bargain. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 30, 2014, 04:11:29 pm http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/092914-719486-lone-wolf-terror-attack-in-oklahoma.htm?p=full
9/29/14 Second Amendment Vs. Islamic State In Oklahoma War On Terror: The Islamic State's call for "lone wolf" attacks on Western infidels might have met its match in the Second Amendment, as an armed man saves lives by shooting a jihadist wannabe bent on heeding that call. Vaughan Foods employee Traci Johnson is alive today because the business she works for is not a gun-free zone at a time when the Islamic State is encouraging attacks on infidels in the West like the one in Moore, Okla., where co-worker Colleen Hufford was stabbed and beheaded. The alleged attacker, 30-year-old Alton Nolen, was stopped as he was stabbing and preparing to behead Johnson by Mark Vaughan, the food distributor's chief operating officer. Vaughn, who is also a reserve county deputy, drew the gun he was carrying and stopped Nolen, police say, before he could claim more victims. "This was not going to stop if he (Vaughan) did not stop it," Moore Police Sgt. Jeremy Lewis told the media. Some will claim this is more "workplace violence" — a phrase used by the Obama administration to describe the carnage left by Maj. Nidal Hassan at Ft. Hood — the work of a disgruntled ex-employee with no significance beyond that. But the similarities are eerie and may indicate the shape of a new threat we face. Nolen was a recent convert to Islam and while still an employee at Vaughan tried to convert his co-workers, they said. He was convicted in 2011 of multiple felony drug offenses, assault and battery on a police officer and escaping from detention. He was released from prison in March 2013. It is suspected that much of his Islamic conversion occurred while he was in prison, an increasingly common phenomenon among African-American inmates. Nolen's Facebook page contains such items as a burning lower Manhattan after the 9/11 attacks and a photo of the pope with the caption "Sharia Law is coming!" In March, Nolen posted a gruesome photo of a beheading with the explanation that "Islamic terrorists behead their victims" because of a precedent bestowed by their prophet, a reference to the Prophet Mohammed's frequent beheadings of those he considered infidels. Nolen might be a lone wolf, but he's just the type the Islamic State is looking for: individuals angry at a society and culture they see as victimizing and oppressing them. They don't need to sneak across the border — they're already here. They don't even need passports, which many have, such as the Minneapolis airport worker who fought and died for IS in Syria. No direct connection has been established. But Nolen is what IS spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani said the group is looking for in a videotaped statement released shortly before the attack in Moore. "If you can kill a disbelieving American or European — especially the spiteful and filthy French — or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that just joined a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way, however that might be." That was the possible motivation of 18-year-old Abdul Numan Haider, who was shot dead after he stabbed two Australian counterterrorism officers on Sept. 23, police said. Haider had been asked to come to a police station after he'd been seen with an Islamic State flag at a shopping center. The incident happened mere days after Australian authorities conducted raids nabbing 15 suspected of IS ties. The Islamic State has issued a global call to lone wolves. One could be standing behind you on the bus, walking next you at the mall or sitting in the next cubicle. In the age of the Islamic State and solo terrorism, gun-free zones are simply an invitation for a terrorist attack. In Moore, Okla., the life-saving value of the Second Amendment was proved once again. It may be our secret weapon in the ongoing war against terrorism. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 20, 2014, 12:40:33 pm tp://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-agrees-decide-gun-ownership-case-165558358.html
Supreme Court agrees to decide gun ownership case 10/20/14 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether a Florida man convicted on drug charges and forced to give up his firearms under federal law could sell the guns or transfer ownership to his wife or a friend. The court agreed to hear an appeal filed by Tony Henderson, a former U.S. Border Patrol agent who was convicted of distributing marijuana and other drug offenses in 2007 and sentenced to six months in prison. Upon his arrest, Henderson voluntarily gave the FBI his 19 firearms. As federal felons cannot possess firearms, Henderson later sought either to sell the guns to an interested buyer or to transfer ownership to his wife. A federal judge refused his request, as did the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a ruling this past January. The legal question is whether the federal prohibition on felons possessing firearms terminates all ownership rights. Lower courts are divided on the issue. John Elwood, Henderson's attorney, said in court filings that if the appeals court ruling against him were to be left intact, it would allow the government to "effectively strip gun owners of their entire ownership interest in significant, lawful household assets following a conviction for an unrelated offense." U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, representing the government, said in court papers there was no need for the Supreme Court to hear the case, in part because Henderson could have sold the guns prior to his conviction. Furthermore, Henderson's proposals would have put the guns in the hands of either his wife or a friend, which "created a significant risk" that he would still retain access to them, Verrilli wrote. A ruling is due by the end of June. The case is Henderson v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-1487. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on October 24, 2014, 01:34:50 pm Police: shooter dead after opening fire at Marysville-Pilchuck High School
A student believed to have opened fire at Marysville-Pilchuck High School Friday morning is dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to two law-enforcement sources. Police have not released details, but there are reports of as many as six other people injured. Ambulances are staging around the school and police are searching room to room with guns drawn, leaving tape to mark the doors of the rooms that have been cleared. Some students were being evacuated from the school, walking out and across the fields with their hands up. Some were being bused to a nearby church. Others were being told to stay inside classrooms. The shooting was reported about 10:45 a.m. We’ll update this post with more information. http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2014/10/shooting-reported-at-marysville-pilchuck-high-school/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 25, 2014, 08:52:54 am Apparently, he was distressed over a girl(or supposedly). On his social media account, he not only expressed it, but it looked like he was quoting rock music lyrics.
Pt being that I don't know if this is a false flag or not, but nonetheless look how much damage rock music has done(no, not just the "hard/heavy metal" stuff, but even the "soft" stuff like the Beach Boys are also luciferian). The moto of rock music is right from Alister Crowley - "Do what thou wilt, thou art the whole of the law". Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 05, 2014, 01:05:39 pm http://www.examiner.com/article/billionaire-backed-gun-control-measure-wins-washington
Billionaire-backed gun control measure wins in Washington; rights win in Ala. 11/4/14 Evergreen State gun control proponents are celebrating passage of the billionaire-backed Initiative 594 while gun rights advocates supporting rival Initiative 591 are wondering what comes next as Tuesday night ballot returns point to a loss for their measure. ======================== UPDATE: Meanwhile, Alabama gun owners scored a major victory Tuesday with passage of a state constitutional amendment that strengthened the right to keep and bear arms, and requires strict scrutiny on any restrictions placed on that right. It was clearly a win for the Alabama Gun Rights organization. The vote was a resounding 73-27 percent, and already some Washington gun owners are hinting they might look at Alabama as a new place to live. According to KVI’s John Carlson Wednesday morning, yesterday’s gun control victory was a “wake-up call” to the firearms community to learn, regroup and come back energetically, and also make sure this doesn’t happen elsewhere. Carlson says the I-594 forces stayed focused, which is why they carried the day. He seems to overlook the massive budget advantage gun prohibitionists had, along with some rather disingenuous news coverage. ======================== At the headquarters of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, grassroots activists are taking some consolation in the change of power in Washington, D.C., and what appears to be continued Republican control of the State Senate, and the fact that I-591 won in a majority of the state's counties. But now the test will be whether the new law will be enforced, or whether it will be unenforceable, as many in law enforcement have contended. While Second Amendment activists were disappointed, gun prohibitionists were partying. The ominous prediction from Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat: “Expect more gun control legislation to come down the pike, and soon. The politics around that issue — the old trembling at the might of the NRA, the worries about the wrath of gun-loving voters — has officially changed.” But a Seattle Times reader may have reflected the mood of many in the firearms community: “Congrautlations (sic) WA,” wrote a reader identifying himself as Jose Castillo. “You just voted to turn thousands of law-abiding citizens into criminals. And what about the real criminals? They couldn't care less. They'll get guns like they always have. Through their friends and connections illegally.” I-594 will require background checks on all firearms transfers, not just sales. There will be use tax requirements. The waiting period on handgun purchases has been doubled from five to ten business days. What comes next? Perhaps attempts to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Maybe an attempt to change Washington back to a “may issue” state where concealed pistol licenses are concerned. Yesterday this column noted that there are now more than 471,000 active CPLs in circulation. Based on what happened Tuesday in Washington, the odds are good that similar efforts will be mounted in other states where big money will be able to dominate the airwaves and overpower grassroots activism, which has been the hallmark of the gun rights movement. Anti-gunners have found a formidable weapon of their own: Money. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 09, 2014, 06:54:13 pm http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-colorado-gun-recall-midterm-election-20141107-story.html
In a turnabout, Colorado Democrats win back seats lost in gun recall 11/9/14 Few states have experienced the political volatility that Colorado has over the last two decades. Control of the Legislature flipped back and forth. The state see-sawed in presidential contests. The last two years, though, have been particularly eventful. In 2013, after Democrats seized control of the statehouse under Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper, lawmakers went on a spree, passing a liberal wish list that thrilled left-leaning constituents but alienated plenty of others, especially rural conservatives upset by a brace of gun-control measures adopted after the July 2012 Aurora theater massacre. The result, just a few months later, was a nationally publicized recall that ended in the ouster of two Democratic lawmakers, one of them president of the state Senate. On Tuesday, however, in a little-noticed footnote to Colorado’s closely watched gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races, the Democrats won back both of those seats, and it wasn’t at all close in either Pueblo or Colorado Springs. At the time, the recall was trumpeted far and wide as a victory for pro-gun activists; a third state senator in the Denver suburbs quit soon after rather than face the prospect of being tossed from office before this year’s elections. Now it’s gun-control activists who are crowing. Mark Glaze, former executive director of the group Everytown for Gun Safety, said the results showed that when a significant portion of the electorate turns out, rather than a small, agitated minority, support for something like universal background checks for gun buyers is a politically winning position. (That was part of the package Hickenlooper, who was reelected Tuesday, signed into law.) “The message remains that the [National Rifle Association] can bully politicians or buy them for a few pieces of silver but they have no influence over the general public,” Glaze said. “Interesting statement from a man who doles out money the way he does,” replied Laura Carno, a conservative strategist in Colorado Springs who helped lead the recall effort against then-State Senate President John Morse. The reference was to former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose generous contributions and organization, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, became an issue in the recall. Once in Denver, the state capital, the Republicans who replaced the two booted Democrats joined efforts to overturn the state’s background check requirement, as well as a new law limiting the size of gun magazines to 15 rounds or fewer. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 10, 2014, 02:04:27 pm UN Arms Treaty Goes Into Effect December 24
The United Nations’ Office for Disarmament Affairs has announced that the Arms Trade Treaty, which regulates the international trade in conventional arms, including small arms to battle tanks and combat aircraft to warships, will officially go into effect December 24, 2014. Joe Wolverton of The New American writes about the most harmful provisions in the treaty and how they can affect Americans, especially Article 5. • Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty. • Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well. • Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme. • Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.” This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.” • Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items. • Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.” In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens. The United States has signed the treaty but not yet ratified it. “Unfortunately, the United States, the world’s largest arms exporter, has signed but not ratified the treaty,” said Dr. Natalie J. Goldring, a senior fellow with the Security Studies Programme in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Spearheaded by Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), on October 15 50 senators signed a letter pledging to oppose the ATT and later 4 more Democrats sent a similar letter bringing the total to 54 sitting senators in opposition. Ted Bromund of the Heritage Foundation wrote that, “The opposition of the Senate and the House to the treaty is clear. But in the three months since the U.S. signed the ATT, the treaty’s proponents have shown yet again that they seek to use it to constrain the U.S., that leading proponents are biased against the U.S., and that they wish to expand the scope of the ATT and incorporate it into the wider U.N. gun-control agenda. Particularly given the dangerous Administration doctrine that signature of the ATT creates the open-ended obligation to achieve vague ideals, it is essential that both the Senate and the House hold hearings to make it clear that the ATT will have no effect on U.S. policy unless and until it is properly ratified.” http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/un-arms-treaty-goes-effect-december-24 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 14, 2014, 09:48:06 am Buffalo Police: Your Family Member Died, Please Give Us Their Gun ... NOW
Cross-referencing obituary to permit holder database I n a new attempt to reduce the amount of guns on the street, police in Buffalo, NY are going after deceased pistol permit holders. Last week at a press conference, the BPD told reporters that a majority of guns used in crimes seem to come from guns stolen from homes. This led to the new program of confiscating guns of the recently-deceased in order to make sure the guns do not make their way to the streets. VIDEO: "We recently started a program where we're cross referencing all the pistol permit holders with the death records, and we're sending people out to collect the guns whenever possible so that they don't end up in the wrong hands," said Police Commissioner Daniel Derrenda. "Because at times they lay out there and the family is not aware of them and they end up just out on the street." According to WGRZ, some police agencies give family members of a deceased permit holder a mere 15 days to sell or transfer the weapons to other permit holders or dealers. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/buffalo-police-your-family-member-died-please-give-us-their-gun-now Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 14, 2014, 12:38:22 pm But they don't seem to care if other stuff from these (deceased)people's homes get stolen(yes, that includes knives).
Title: MYSTERY: SANDY HOOK VICTIM DIES (AGAIN) IN PAKISTAN Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 02, 2015, 05:50:53 pm :o
http://www.infowars.com/mystery-sandy-hook-victim-dies-again-in-pakistan/ MYSTERY: SANDY HOOK VICTIM DIES (AGAIN) IN PAKISTAN Photo of child killed at Sandy Hook shows up at Pakistani school shooting 2/2/15 (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/noah-p.jpg) A large-scale attack on a school in Peshawar, Pakistan, last month left 132 school children and 10 teachers dead. Among the alleged victims emerged the familiar face of Noah Pozner, one of the children supposedly killed in the December 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/pozner3.jpg) Without explanation, Pozner’s image has appeared in multiple photos and reports of the high-profile Army Public School shooting, reportedly carried out by 9 members of an elite Taliban terror group on December 16. (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/pozner-fb1.jpg) Despite his death over two years ago, Pozner also managed to be memorialized on a wall dedicated to the APSACS massacre victims, according to a photo taken by Agence-France Press. (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/afp-pozner1.jpg) Pozner’s smiling face is also prominently displayed in a photo meme appearing on the website aworldatschool.org, who lists among its supporters the globalist NGO USAID and several United Nations sub-branches, and his photo is also tagged with the name “Huzaifa Huxaifa” on the “Army Public School & College – Boys Peshawar” Facebook page. (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/1512448_843041549050383_640545714999262565_n.jpg) A large poster-sized image of Pozner also appears on a memorial wall in Peshawar, and can be spotted in at least two BBC world news reports. (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/bbc-pozner1.jpg) A journalist with Pakistan’s Express Tribune spotted the image of Pozner early on: (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5Dnn67CAAANA8r.jpg) omar r quraishi @omar_quraishi Follow Should be pointed out that bottom middle child in this collage is actually a Sandy Hook victim - 6 yr old Noah Pozner 4:14 AM - 17 Dec 2014 As yet, no official explanation has emerged as to why Pozner’s photo has been inserted among the APSCS victims, but the BBC speculates that internet “recycling” of images is to blame, as another photo featuring a bloody shoe was also misattributed to the same event. Can the photo’s misuse simply be brushed off as another bumbling Google image search mistake, or is it be willful subterfuge aimed at poking fun at those who question the validity of the Sandy Hook event? Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Christian40 on June 03, 2015, 05:31:33 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcG5hnYQjPA
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 08, 2015, 07:25:25 pm http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-08/nra-rejected-by-u-s-supreme-court-on-san-francisco-gun-law?cmpid=yhoo
6/8/15 NRA Rejected by U.S. Supreme Court on San Francisco Gun Law The U.S. Supreme Court turned away a National Rifle Association challenge to a San Francisco law that requires people who store handguns at home to either put them in a lockbox or disable them with a trigger lock. Over two dissents, the justices left intact a federal appeals court decision that said the 2007 law was a reasonable step that fostered gun safety without significantly impinging constitutional rights. The rebuff is a setback for gun-rights advocates, who have repeatedly tried and failed in recent years to get the high court to expand the protections under the Second Amendment. The two dissenting justices, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, said lower courts are ignoring 2008 and 2010 Supreme Court decisions that interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting individual gun rights. “Despite the clarity with which we described the Second Amendment’s core protection for the right of self-defense, lower courts, including the ones here, have failed to protect it,” Thomas wrote for the pair. Thomas and Scalia said they would have heard the appeal, filed by six San Francisco residents and groups including the NRA. While the 2007 San Francisco law requires people who store handguns at home to either put them in a lockbox or disable them with a trigger lock, people can carry a gun in the home without a trigger lock. ‘Immediate Self-Defense’ The appeal contended that the San Francisco law was similar to the Washington, D.C., trigger-lock requirement invalidated in the high court’s 2008 decision. The groups pointed to a passage in the 2008 opinion that said Washington residents were barred from having a firearm “operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.” In urging the justices to reject the latest appeal, San Francisco officials said the two measures contained important differences. Washington had an outright ban on handguns, and its trigger-lock rule also applied to long guns. “San Francisco’s ordinance allows citizens to carry loaded and unlocked handguns on their person at any time, including in a holster,” the city argued. “It also allows citizens to store loaded handguns within an easily opened lockbox rather than ‘disassembled or bound by a trigger lock at all times,’” officials added, quoting from the 2008 ruling. The case is Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco, 14-704. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 18, 2015, 09:49:44 pm http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-avoid-talk-race-guns-charleston-shooting-223727180.html
Republicans avoid talk of race, guns after Charleston shooting 6/18/15 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidates steered clear on Thursday of addressing the role gun rights and racial tensions may have played in a deadly mass shooting in South Carolina as Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton called for the United States to face what she called the "hard truths" underpinning the tragedy. The responses to the attack in Charleston, in which a white man is suspected of killing nine black people at a historic church, showed the contrasting pressures facing White House hopefuls in each party as they prepare for primary contests. Clinton and other Democrats are appealing to a racially diverse voter base that has been frustrated by an inability to tighten gun laws after other mass shootings. Those voters are also increasingly vocal about heavy handed law-enforcement tactics in black communities following a series of police killings of unarmed African-American men. Republicans, meanwhile, have successfully loosened gun restrictions across the country in recent years while catering to core voters who are overwhelmingly white. Clinton cited past mass shootings as she called for the United States to confront the toll taken by racial prejudice and gun violence. "How many people do we need to see cut down before we act?" she said in Las Vegas. Several Republican candidates issued statements expressing condolences in the wake of the attack. But unlike Clinton and President Barack Obama, they did not call for action to reduce similar attacks. Few were willing to label the murders a hate crime, although police in Charleston said the attack was racially motivated. "There's a sickness in our country, there's something terribly wrong, but it isn't going to be fixed by your government," the libertarian-leaning Kentucky Senator Rand Paul told a group of religious conservatives in Washington. "It's people not understanding where salvation comes from." Speaking at the same event, Texas Senator Ted Cruz did not mention the race or possible motivation of the suspected shooter, 21-year-old Dylann Roof. The young man's Facebook profile showed him wearing a jacket emblazoned with flags of apartheid-era South Africa and of the former Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, both formerly ruled by white minorities. "A sick and deranged person came and prayed with an historically black congregation for an hour and then murdered nine innocent souls,” Cruz said, without referring to the race of the shooter. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a leading contender, did not mention the attack in his 20-minute speech. There is little incentive for the Republican Party to press deeply into the episode since the party's voters overwhelmingly favor expansive gun rights. Their opposition, backed by the powerful National Rifle Association, ensured Obama failed in his bid to expand background checks on gun buyers after a gunman killed 20 schoolchildren and 6 adults in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012. Obama acknowledged on Thursday that further efforts in Washington to tighten gun controls were likely to be futile, saying the "politics in this town foreclose" attempts to limit gun rights. Americans, too, are divided on the subject of gun control, with 48 percent supporting government restrictions and 41 percent saying they should not be regulated, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll taken in April. Some 61 percent of Republicans oppose firearms regulation, while Democrats support it by an equal proportion. Beyond the gun issue, the voters who will choose the next Republican nominee are overwhelmingly white - in 2012, they made up 90 percent of voters in the Republican primary contests. That means there is little incentive -- and perhaps a real downside -- for conservatives to grapple head-on with racial tensions spurred by the Charleston shootings. Some comments by voters at the event attended by Paul, Cruz and others bore that out. “I'm tired of hearing that every time someone shoots someone from another race that it's racially motivated,” said John Cartree, 78, of Columbia, Mo. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 20, 2015, 07:23:51 pm Obama admin looks to ban some Social Security recipients from owning guns
The Obama administration wants to keep people collecting Social Security benefits from owning guns if it is determined they are unable to manage their own affairs, the Los Angeles Times reported. The push, which could potentially affect millions whose monthly disability payments are handled by others, is intended to bring the Social Security Administration in line with laws that prevent gun sales to felons, drug addicts, immigrants in the United States illegally, and others, according to the paper. The language of federal gun laws restricts ownership to people who are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease” – which could potentially affect a large group within Social Security, the LA Times reported. If Social Security, which has never taken part in the background check system, uses the same standard as the Department of Veterans Affairs – which is the idea floated – then millions of beneficiaries could be affected, with about 4.2 million adults receiving monthly benefits that are managed by “representative payees.” The latest move is part of the efforts by President Obama to strengthen gun control following the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in 2012. Critics are blasting the plan, saying that expanding the list of people who cannot own guns based on financial competence is wrongheaded. The ban, they argue, would keep guns out of the hands of some dangerous people, but would also include people who simply have a bad memory or have a hard time balancing a checkbook. The background check for gun ownership started in 1993 by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, named after White House Press Secretary James Brady, who was partially paralyzed after being shot in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan. Gun stores are required to run the names of potential buyers through a computerized system before every sale. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/20/obama-looks-to-ban-social-security-recipients-from-owning-guns/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 23, 2015, 10:22:50 pm Official: 2 dead in movie theater shooting, including gunman
7/23/15 http://news.yahoo.com/official-2-dead-movie-theater-shooting-including-gunman-015727028.html LAFAYETTE, La. (AP) — A gunman opened fire at a movie theater in Lousiana on Thursday night, killing at least one person and injuring at least six others before shooting himself, officials said. The shooting took place at the Grand Theatre in the city of Lafayette, said Clay Henry, vice president of operations for Acadian Ambulance. Henry said eight people were brought to the hospital and that two, including the gunman, were pronounced dead on arrival. Henry said emergency workers got the call to go to the theater about 7:30 p.m. He did not immediately have any additional information. The Daily Advertiser quoted City Marshal Brian Pope as saying that the shooter turned the gun on himself after firing at the others, and that six people were injured. The shooting happened about 20 minutes into a 7 p.m. showing of the movie "Train Wreck," according to the newspaper, which quoted theatergoer Katie Domingue. "We heard a loud pop we thought was a firecracker," Domingue told the newspaper. Domingue said she saw "an older white man" standing up and shooting down into the theater, but not in her direction. "He wasn't saying anything. I didn't hear anybody screaming either," Domingue said. Domingue told the newspaper she heard about six shots before she and her fiance ran to the nearest exist, leaving behind her shoes and purse. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 09, 2015, 12:07:07 pm http://news.yahoo.com/northern-arizona-university-student-kills-one--injuries-three-with-handgun--police-140215971.html
10/9/15 Northern Arizona University student kills one, injures three with handgun: police By Michael Walsh Police officers investigate a shooting at Northern Arizona University campus in Flagstaff, Ariz., Friday, Oct. 9, 2015. An overnight confrontation between two groups of students escalated into gunfire early Friday when a student killed one person and wounded three others, authorities said. One person was killed and three were injured in a shooting outside a dormitory early Friday morning at Northern Arizona University in the city of Flagstaff. The gunman is now in custody and the surviving victims are being treated at Flagstaff Medical Center, the school said. “We are asking the faculty to be sensitive to the needs of our students and their families,” Northern State University President Rita Cheng said during a news conference at 6 a.m. local time. “This is not going to be a normal day at NAU. Our hearts are heavy.” Authorities identified the student who died as Colin Brough and the injured victims as Nicholas Prato, Kyle Zientek and Nicholas Piring. Northern Arizona University Police Chief Gregory T. Fowler identified the gunman as 18-year-old student Steven Jones and said he used a handgun. Jones allegedly fired his gun at 1:20 a.m. during a confrontation that spiraled out of control outside Mountainview Hall on the northeast side of the campus. The suspect had stopped shooting the firearm by the time campus police arrived and did not attempt to flee the scene, according to Fowler. Jones was taken into custody without further incident. “A great many people are involved and need to be interviewed, and a lot of things need to be accomplished before we can release a great many details,” Fowler said. All of the victims are male, he said. The Northern Arizona University Police Department, the Flagstaff Police Department and other local law enforcement agencies are at the school investigating the incident. Once the sun comes up, Fowler said, the officers will have a better field of view for analyzing the crime scene, and more information will become available. “We can’t release a lot of additional details at this time,” he said. Support services are available for students, faculty and staff at the campus’ Health and Learning Center. The university also set up a family assistance center in the ballroom of the 1899 Bar & Grill. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 28, 2015, 08:04:00 pm http://news.yahoo.com/several-people-shot-indianapolis-mall-local-media-232352379.html
Several people shot at Indianapolis mall: local media 10/28/15 Reuters) - Up to three people were wounded in a shooting on Wednesday at Washington Square Mall in Indianapolis, Indianapolis television station WTHR reported, citing Indianapolis Metropolitan Police officers. Their conditions were not immediately known, WTHR reported. Indianapolis police responded to the mall at about 6:30 p.m. on the report of people shot, the Indianapolis Star newspaper reported. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 31, 2015, 11:26:23 pm http://news.yahoo.com/four-dead-including-suspect-colorado-springs-shootings-212304206.html
10/31/15 Shooter kills three in Colorado Springs, dies in confrontation with police (Reuters) - A suspect killed three people in a series of shootings in downtown Colorado Springs on Saturday before dying in an exchange of gunfire with police, authorities said. Colorado Springs police responding to an emergency call tracked down the suspect and returned fire after being shot at, the El Paso County Sheriff's Office said in a statement. The shootings and the suspect's shootout with police in front of a Wendy's restaurant unfolded about a mile from the U.S. Olympic Training Center in the central Colorado town. Police said they closed off several streets to investigate the shootings, which spanned at least five city blocks. "It's going to take quite a few hours for us to work that," said Colorado Springs police spokeswoman Lt. Catherine Buckley. Buckley said the suspect killed three people before exchanging gunfire with police. She declined to release any details on the shooter or the ages or genders of the three victims. Authorities said there appears to be no further threat to the Colorado Springs area, which is home to the U.S. Air Force Academy and has a population of about 445,000. No one else was injured in the series of shootings, said El Paso County Sheriff's Office spokeswoman Jacqueline Kirby. Matt Abshire, 21, told the Colorado Springs Gazette he looked out from his apartment and saw a man with a rifle shoot another person. Abshire then went outside and saw the shooter open fire and strike two women, one of whom appears to have been shot in the face, he told the newspaper. Just over three years ago a gunman killed 12 people at a movie theater in the Denver suburb of Aurora in an attack that ranks as one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. (Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis in Los Angeles and Brendan O'Brien in Milwaukee; Editing by James Dalgleish) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on November 18, 2015, 09:09:30 pm Obama says gun control to be top issue of final year
President Obama hopes to make gun control the top issue of his final year in office, saying Americans aren’t more violent than other people but they “have more deadly weapons to act out their rage.” In an interview published Tuesday in GQ magazine, Mr. Obama said easy access to guns is “the only variable” between the U.S. and other developed countries. “The main thing that I’ve been trying to communicate over the last several of these horrific episodes is that, contrary to popular belief, Americans are not more violent than people in other developed countries,” Mr. Obama said. “But they have more deadly weapons to act out their rage.” Asked by interviewer Bill Simmons of HBO if gun control will be the “dominant” issue on his agenda next year, Mr. Obama replied, “I hope so.” “We have this weird habit in this culture of mourning and, you know, 48, 72 hours of wall-to-wall coverage, and then … suddenly we move on,” Mr. Obama said. “And I will do everything I can to make sure that there’s a sustained attention paid to this thing.” The president has begun to speak out about gun regulations more forcefully in recent months, following mass shootings at a church in South Carolina and a community college in Oregon. He said in the magazine article that the aftermath of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Connecticut in December 2012 was “the worst few days of my presidency.” rest: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/17/obama-says-gun-control-be-top-issue-final-year/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 19, 2015, 10:25:42 am Sadly, he'll probably get what he wants - pretty much, he's been successfully push many agendas - now, with all the waves of shootings going around regularly, the masses are likely "worn out" over this, and likely concede.
Obama says gun control to be top issue of final year President Obama hopes to make gun control the top issue of his final year in office, saying Americans aren’t more violent than other people but they “have more deadly weapons to act out their rage.” In an interview published Tuesday in GQ magazine, Mr. Obama said easy access to guns is “the only variable” between the U.S. and other developed countries. “The main thing that I’ve been trying to communicate over the last several of these horrific episodes is that, contrary to popular belief, Americans are not more violent than people in other developed countries,” Mr. Obama said. “But they have more deadly weapons to act out their rage.” Asked by interviewer Bill Simmons of HBO if gun control will be the “dominant” issue on his agenda next year, Mr. Obama replied, “I hope so.” “We have this weird habit in this culture of mourning and, you know, 48, 72 hours of wall-to-wall coverage, and then … suddenly we move on,” Mr. Obama said. “And I will do everything I can to make sure that there’s a sustained attention paid to this thing.” The president has begun to speak out about gun regulations more forcefully in recent months, following mass shootings at a church in South Carolina and a community college in Oregon. He said in the magazine article that the aftermath of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Connecticut in December 2012 was “the worst few days of my presidency.” rest: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/17/obama-says-gun-control-be-top-issue-final-year/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 28, 2015, 03:52:42 pm http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/right-on-time-for-chicago-riots-another-spontaneous-mass-shooting-takes-place/
RIGHT IN TIME FOR CHICAGO RIOTS, ANOTHER ‘SPONTANEOUS’ MASS SHOOTING TAKES PLACE President Obama has been briefed about the shooting and Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton wrote a tweet supportive of Planned Parenthood, saying "Today and every day, we #StandWithPP." 11/27/15 AT LEAST THREE DEAD, INCLUDING COP, AFTER MASS SHOOTING GUNMAN OPENS FIRE AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD IN COLORADO SPRINGS; FIVE POLICE OFFICERS SHOT, 9 PEOPLE STILL HOSPITALIZED EDITOR’S NOTE: IT HAS BECOME AS PREDICTABLE AS THE RISING OF THE SUN OR THE WAVES THAT LAP AGAINST THE SANDY SHORELINE. WHENEVER THERE IS A RACIALLY-MOTIVATED INCIDENT IN THE COUNTRY LIKE FERGUSON, BALTIMORE AND NOW IN CHICAGO, A “SPONTANEOUS” MASS SHOOTER COMES UP OUT OF NOWHERE AND KILLS PEOPLE. THIS TIME THEY RIGGED IT TO COVER BOTH PRO-ABORTION AND ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT ISSUES. TOMORROW IT WILL ‘BE REVEALED’ THAT THE SHOOTER WAS ON DOCTOR PRESCRIBED ANTIDEPRESSANTS. SHOCKER. Three people, including a police officer, were killed and a gunman is in custody after he opened fire and shot at least five cops and several other civilians at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, authorities say. The murdered police officer was identified as 44-year-old Garrett Swasey, a six-year veteran of the force at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, the college said. There is a “huge crime scene that has to be processed,” the city’s mayor, John Suthers, told reporters. The Friday incident began around noon and didn’t end with the suspect in cuffs into approximately 5 p.m. local time. The shackled suspect was a white man who wore white T-shirt, a graying beard and glasses, pictures of the arrest show. Our hearts go out to the people and families affected by this shooting, but do not believe for a second that the shooter just ‘spontaneously’ thought to do this out of the blue. False flag events like this are a hallmark of the the Obama administration so eager to dissolve the Second Amendment and promote abortions. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 28, 2015, 06:20:46 pm https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-shooting-at-planned-parenthood-put-gop-2016-203438711.html
The shooting at Planned Parenthood put GOP 2016 hopefuls in a ‘politically uncomfortable’ position Hunter Walker November 28, 2015 The motive for a shooting that took place outside a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colo., on Friday still isn’t clear, but all three of the top Democratic presidential candidates quickly rushed to express their support for the organization. Meanwhile, the leading Republicans, all of whom have spoken out against Planned Parenthood, have largely remained silent about the shooting. Operatives from both parties suggested to Yahoo News that the incident puts the GOP field in a tough spot because of its opposition to Planned Parenthood. The organization is the country’s largest provider of abortions. Three people were killed in the shooting. One of the victims was a police officer who responded to a call for help. The suspect has been identified as Robert Lewis Dear, who was reportedly captured on the scene in Colorado Springs after surrendering to law enforcement. According to the Associated Press, Dear had spent part of his time living in a North Carolina shack, and his neighbors described him as an incoherent loner with no known political or religious leanings. However, John Suthers, the Republican mayor of Colorado Springs, suggested people could draw conclusions about a motive for the attack by drawing “inferences from where it took place.” President Obama issued a statement on the shooting Saturday that did not address the question of opposition to abortion as a potential motive. Instead, the president suggested that the incident is further proof of the need for stronger gun control. “We don’t yet know what this particular gunman’s so-called motive was for shooting 12 people, or for terrorizing an entire community, when he opened fire with an assault weapon and took hostages at a Planned Parenthood center in Colorado. What we do know is that he killed a cop in the line of duty, along with two of the citizens that police officer was trying to protect,” Obama said, adding, “This is not normal. We can’t let it become normal.” The three top Democrats vying to be Obama’s successor all addressed the shooting on Twitter. Both frontrunner Hillary Clinton and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley issued expressions of support for Planned Parenthood. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., took things a step further and suggested antiabortion rhetoric could have encouraged the attack. “I strongly support Planned Parenthood and the work it’s doing. I hope people realize that bitter rhetoric can have unintended consequences,” Sanders wrote. Indeed, all of the leading Republican candidates have expressed opposition to Planned Parenthood. And almost none of them have made any public comment on the shooting. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is the only major Republican presidential hopeful who has tweeted about the incident. “Praying for the loved ones of those killed, those injured & first responders who bravely got the situation under control in Colorado Springs,” Cruz wrote. Yahoo News reached out to the campaigns of all of the other leading Republicans to see if they had any comment on the shootings. As of this writing, Anna Epstein, a spokeswoman for businesswoman Carly Fiorina was the only one to respond. “Carly will be on Fox News Sunday tomorrow, and she’ll likely react then,” Epstein said. There was no comment on the shooting from representatives for real estate mogul Donald Trump, former neurosurgeon Ben Carson, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., or New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. All nine of these Republicans have spoken out against Planned Parenthood and expressed support for taking federal funding from the organization. Cruz has led a congressional push to defund Planned Parenthood by threatening a government shutdown. A Democratic operative who works in Colorado told Yahoo News they believe the shooting will hurt the GOP field because it “reminds voters of the relentless Republican campaign against women’s health and the right to choose.” They also suggested the shooting would highlight Republican opposition to gun control. In messages to Yahoo News, Amanda Carpenter, a Republican strategist and former top aide to Cruz, acknowledged that the shooting could be “politically uncomfortable” for GOP candidates because they oppose Planned Parenthood and also abhor the violent shooting. Carpenter suggested that the candidates should have followed Cruz’s example and commented on the shooting regardless of their stance on abortion. “Candidates can choose to avoid commenting on crisis, but a president cannot,” Carpenter said. “While it’s prudent to wait for all information, GOP candidates should easily be able to express sorrow, whether this situation is politically uncomfortable or not.” Carpenter went on to describe the silence in the Republican field as “sad.” “This event happened 24 hours ago, and lives were lost. It’s sad more candidates can’t show their support for those in mourning. Republicans can disagree with what PP does and grieve for those injured and killed,” she said. “Being pro-life means opposing murder, period. Law enforcement lives are at risk each day, as shown in Colorado yesterday. They need our support more than ever, and the GOP should not hesitate to give it.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 02, 2015, 09:43:34 pm 12 PEOPLE KILLED IN MASS SHOOTING AT SAN BERNARDINO SOCIAL SERVICES FACILITY
http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/12-people-killed-in-mass-shooting-at-san-bernardino-social-services-facility/ A source confirmed to Eyewitness News that there were three shooters armed with rifles, and there were no suspects in custody. Riverside police said they are helping other agencies look for male suspects in a black SUV, possibly a GMC Yukon. 12/2/15 POLICE SAID THERE MAY BE MULTIPLE VICTIMS IN AN ACTIVE-SHOOTING SITUATION IN SAN BERNARDINO WEDNESDAY. SOURCES TELL EYEWITNESS NEWS THAT UP TO 12 PEOPLE WERE KILLED. The shooting took place at the Inland Regional Center, a nonprofit that works with individuals with developmental disabilities, at 1365 S. Waterman Avenue. The complex is comprised of three buildings. Sgt. Vicki Cervantes with San Bernardino police said the shooting occurred during some type of scheduled event at the facility. WATCH: Live coverage of the active-shooting situation in San Bernardino Inland Regional Center employee Brandon Hunt told Eyewitness News that he believes the shooting took place in the building with the facility’s main auditorium, where a banquet of some sort was being held. He said the auditorium is regularly rented out to outside agencies. Hunt said approximately 550 people typically work at the facility at any given day. MORE: What we know about the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino Investigators were searching the building and have yet to clear it. Police said there were reports of one to three shooters involved, and they were described to be wearing ski masks. A source confirmed to Eyewitness News that there were three shooters armed with rifles, and there were no suspects in custody. Riverside police said they are helping other agencies look for male suspects in a black SUV, possibly a GMC Yukon. The suspects are heavily armed and were possibly wearing body armor, according to Cervantes. source Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 03, 2015, 11:18:53 am http://news.yahoo.com/other-mass-shooting-wednesday-didnt-150340934.html
The Other Mass Shooting on Wednesday That You Didn't Hear About 12/3/15 Again. As reports streamed in on Wednesday that a mass shooting had taken place in San Bernardino, California an exasperated nation recoiled in a mixture of horror and dismay. Just five days before the San Bernardino massacre, in which police say Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik killed at least 14 people and injured 17 others at a community center, the country's eyes had been on Colorado Springs, Colorado, where an anti-abortion extremist killed three and wounded nine at a Planned Parenthood facility. But Wednesday's carnage in California didn't mark the first mass shooting since Robert Dear opened fire at the Colorado Springs clinic. It wasn't even the first mass shooting to occur on Wednesday. Hours before the San Bernardino shooting was underway, gunmen in Savannah, Georgia killed one woman and injured three men, the Washington Post noted. What happened in Savannah: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that authorities are searching for two gunmen in the shooting, which occurred in the early morning hours in a residential area and killed Brandy Council, 34. Three other victims — Jamond Heyward, 17, Jarrett Myers, 40, and Jeran Washington, 52 — sustained non-life-threatening injuries, the paper reported. Authorities have yet to announce if they've ascertained a motive in the case, the Journal-Constitution reports. The Savannah shooting largely eluded national attention, which attests to the disconcertingly humdrum nature of mass shootings in America. It's unsurprising that a shooting with more than 31 casualties consumed the nation's attention on Wednesday, but it's a sad commentary on how routine gun violence has become that we tend only to pay attention when there are casualties on such a dramatic scale. "You have 14 people dead in California, and that's a horrible tragedy. But likely 88 other people died today from gun violence in the United States." The Savannah and San Bernardino attacks marked the 354th and 355th mass shootings to take place on American soil this year, according to data compiled by the Post from the Mass Shooting Tracker, which defines a mass shooting as an incident in which at least four people are either injured or killed. That means that mass shootings have occurred at a rate of more than one a day in 2015; Wednesday was the 336th day of the year. Gun violence overall: Even mass shootings that do command national attention only account for a sliver of the deaths from gun violence that occur each day in America. As Everytown for Gun Safety's Ted Alcorn told the New York Times, "You have 14 people dead in California, and that's a horrible tragedy. But likely 88 other people died today from gun violence in the United States." Using data from the Centers for Disease Control, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence estimates that 31 people are murdered with a gun each day in America, 151 are treated for gun wounds and another 55 kill themselves with a gun. In 2015 to date, according to the Gun Violence Archive, 12,219 people have died as a result of gun violence in America, while another 24,716 people have been injured. Such jarring statistics underscore the brutal truth behind the BBC's report on San Bernardino Wednesday evening, which opened with the chilling words, "Just another day in the United States of America." Reacting to the San Bernardino shooting on Wednesday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton reiterated her call for gun safety reform, tweeting, "I refuse to accept this as normal." The unsettling reality, however, is that in the absence of serious action to confront gun violence, mass shootings have become all too normal. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 04, 2015, 09:41:18 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsHbPGA0PHU
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 04, 2015, 03:48:46 pm https://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2015/12/04/poll-did-you-know-that-17-people-were-shot-at-a-new-orleans-playground-a-week-ago/
Poll: Did you know that 17 people were shot at a New Orleans playground a week ago? I didn’t know until just now. http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/11/bunny_friend_shooting_suspect_1.html New Orleans playground shooting suspect has long rap sheet November 27, 2015 New Orleans police were hunting Friday (Nov. 27) for Joseph “Moe” Allen, 32, the first suspect to be named in the Bunny Friend Park shooting that injured 17 people. And they are pleading for people who were at the Upper 9th Ward playground to come forward with information. Despite the crowds at the park when the gunfire erupted Sunday evening, no one there had sent videos to police, Mayor Mitch Landrieu said. “And everyone knows there are lots,” he said. “We need videos. We need photos. We need people to come forward,” police Superintendent Michael Harrison said. Two groups of people turned their guns on each other, and police found as many as 70 bullet casings just the next morning. No shooters other than Allen have been identified by police. “This is just the first shoe to drop,” Landrieu said. “We are going to do everything we can to make sure all the other shoes drop as well.” The mayor warned that anyone harboring Allen also will be prosecuted. “All of us are going to work around the clock,” Harrison promised. Allen, 32, faces 17 counts of attempted first-degree murder. Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office records show he is a convicted felon with a rap sheet dating from 2002. It includes home invasion, carjacking, illegal carrying of weapon and possession of **** and heroin. At a Friday afternooon news conference, officials sidestepped several questions, including whether they had identified the musical group that was said to be recording a video at the park at the time of the shooting and whether Allen belonged to the gang family that includes the father of murdered 5-year-old Briana Allen. However, Harrison did say Allen has ties to more than one group. Sheriff’s Office records show Allen was arrested in 2002 with Travis Scott, who recently pleaded guilty to a federal racketeering charge as the ringleader of the FnD gang, named for Frenchmen and Derbigny streets. Harrison said all but one or two of the Bunny Friend Park victims were in “fair to good condition,” and no one’s wounds were life-threatening. “We are so glad that it wasn’t worse,” he said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 05, 2015, 04:14:27 pm http://news.yahoo.com/york-times-puts-gun-control-editorial-page-1-053324386.html
New York Times puts gun control editorial on Page 1 12/5/15 NEW YORK (AP) — The New York Times is using space on its front page to call for greater gun regulation in the wake of recent deadly mass shootings. Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. says the newspaper is running its first Page 1 editorial since 1920 on Saturday to "deliver a strong and visible statement of frustration and anguish about our country's inability to come to terms with the scourge of guns." The Times' editorial (http://nyti.ms/1N9eKmi ) suggests drastically reducing the number of firearms and even "eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition." The editorial comes after three people were fatally shot at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colorado, last week and 14 people were killed in a shooting Wednesday at a social services center in San Bernardino, California. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 07, 2015, 04:05:28 pm http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-denies-assault-weapons-ban-challenge-150615801.html
12/7/15 Supreme Court denies assault weapons ban challenge On Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court denied a potentially significant case on the ability of some Americans to own assault weapons. The case of Friedman v. City of Highland Park has been listed in recent months for consideration by the nine Supreme Court Justices in private conference. It takes a minimum for four Justices to agree to hear an appeal before the full Court during its current term. Without announcing the vote count in private conference today, the Supreme Court declined to accept the appeal from Dr. Arie Friedman and the Illinois State Rifle Association. They believed the suburban Illinois city violated their Second Amendment rights when it passed the ownership ban on various semi-automatic weapons, as well as a ban on ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Link: Read Thomas’ Dissent Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a written dissent after the denial, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia. “The Court’s refusal to review a decision that flouts two of our Second Amendment precedents stands in marked contrast to the Court’s willingness to summarily reverse courts that disregard our other constitutional decisions,” Thomas said. “There is no basis for a different result when our Second Amendment precedents are at stake.” Back in April 2015, a divided the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled in favor of the Highland Park weapons ban. In the 2-1 decision, Judge Frank Easterbrook said that the issue of a national right to own specific weapons was best left to the Supreme Court. Two landmark rulings, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, set recent Supreme Court precedents on gun ownership in very general terms. Link: Interpreting the Second Amendment In Our Interactive Constitution “Heller and McDonald set limits on the regulation of firearms; but within those limits, they leave matters open. The best way to evaluate the relation among assault weapons, crime, and self‐defense is through the political process and scholarly debate, not by parsing ambiguous passages in the Supreme Court’s opinions,” said Easterbrook in April 2015. Seventh Circuit Appeals Judge Daniel Manion disagreed with Easterbrook in a strongly worded dissent. Limiting gun ownership restricts self-defense and represents an “enormous transfer of authority from the citizens of this country to the government – a result directly contrary to our Constitution and to our political tradition,” he wrote. In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the attorneys for Friedman wanted the Court to spell out some more details on its Second Amendment jurisprudence. “The Seventh Circuit upheld bans on commonly possessed firearms and magazines that clearly are unconstitutional under Heller, and it did so by applying a newly minted three-part test, all three parts of which stand in direct conflict with. Enough is enough,” their brief said. Highland Park petitioned the Supreme Court to deny the appeal. “The City of Highland Park’s ordinance bans only highly dangerous weapons that have been used in a series of mass shooting events, and it does not violate the Second Amendment,” it claims. “Restrictions on assault weapons and large capacity magazines have been repeatedly held to be in harmony with this Court’s decisions in Heller and McDonald and do not impose an unconstitutional burden on the rights secured by the Second Amendment.” Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 24, 2015, 08:03:40 pm http://news.yahoo.com/judge-rules-gun-dealers-may-214422044.html
12/24/15 Judge Rules Gun Dealers May Have to Pay For Crimes Committed With Weapons They Sell Seattle will be ringing in 2016 with new gun control legislation. On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson's decision aligned with City Council's unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers. In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson's ruling flouted the law. But during the case's hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported. Attorney William Abrams stated, "Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes." This simple fact doesn't mean the NRA will stand down. "This is not the final word," NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to the Examiner. "We will keep fighting until all legal avenues are exhausted and the people of Seattle are free to exercise their Second Amendment rights without persecution from their elected officials." Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, claimed the city was upholding discrimination in his decision. "It is unconscionable for Mayor Ed Murray and the City Council to codify what amounts to social bigotry against firearms retailers and their customers, " Gottlieb said. Nonetheless, Robinson's ruling cuts through the noise. In their case, the plaintiffs argued that the tax on firearms and ammunition was impermissible, according to Washington State law. In Robinson's official verdict, she calls their reading of the law "too narrow." She writes, "The guns and ammunition may never be used, may be used only at a range, or may be used exclusively for safe and legal purposes. Accordingly, the fee imposed is a tax rather than a regulation." Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said he believes this victory will help spur future change. "For too long, we have had insufficient research and data on gun violence to help guide our response. We will now have critical funding to advance our work on gun-violence research and prevention," Murray said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on December 30, 2015, 05:32:13 pm Happy New Year! California Law Allows Seizure of Legally-Owned Guns Without Notice
"A time out, if you will." Gun law-laden California is adding another one to the books starting January 1, that will allow police to seize legally-owned firearms if a judge decides there is a threat of potential violence posed by the owner. This new law was passed last year after the shooting at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where six people died including the gunman. The parents of Elliot Rodger reported their concerns to police about their teenage son's mental health and specifically his strange online postings prior to the shooting. But when police interviewed Rodger and determined he didn't pose any threats, his apartment wasn't searched. There they would have found his stockpile of weapons. And thus AB1014 is born. Under the law, a family can obtain what the Washington Times reported as a "gun violence restraining order." Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore added: "The law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will. It's a short duration and it allows for due process. It's an opportunity for mental health professionals to provide an analysis of a person's mental state." The Daily Caller reports: [T]he factors a judge can consider in granting the restraining order include not only threats of violence, but also prior felony arrests (even without a conviction), evidence of alcohol abuse, and even the simple act of recently purchasing a gun or ammunition. Once granted, police can use the restraining order to confiscate all of a person’s guns and ammunition, and the person is also barred from buying or possessing guns and ammo for the duration of the order. A full court hearing must then be heard within three weeks. At that hearing, a judge will be able to extend the restraining order for an entire year. With that comes concern over the government abusing its power, causing groups like the NRA to encourage folks to seek legal counsel if they feel they are being unjustifiably targeted. And with all the gun laws in California doing such a bang-up job (excuse the pun), one more couldn't hurt, right? http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/happy-new-year-california-law-allows-seizure-legally-owned-guns-without-notice Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 31, 2015, 11:32:35 pm Obama set to unveil curbs on gun sellers
Executive actions expected next week will be part of the president's new year push to make progress on long-stalled problems before the 2016 presidential election heats up. By Sarah Wheaton and Edward-Isaac Dovere 12/31/15 05:59 AM EST Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/obama-guns-gun-control-217234#ixzz3vy4OlgZ1 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 04, 2016, 05:02:01 pm http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-gun-control-measures-spark-political-legal-fights-191645179--finance.html
Obama: New gun control measures are legal, could save lives 1/4/16 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Monday his new executive actions to tighten gun rules were "well within" his legal authority and consistent with the U.S. right to bear arms, a warning to opponents who are likely to challenge them in court. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Obama said his administration would unveil the new measures over the next several days. Obama is igniting a political firestorm by bypassing Congress with the measures, which are likely to redefine what it means to be a gun dealer and spark increased use of background checks. Republicans say Obama is misusing his powers. "The good news is .. these are not only recommendations that are well within my legal authority and the executive branch, but they're also ones that the overwhelming majority of the American people, including gun owners, support," Obama said during a meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch and other advisers. Shares in gun makers Smith & Wesson Holding Corp and Sturm Ruger & Co Inc rose against a falling stock market on Monday in anticipation of increased gun sales, as has happened before when the White House mulled weapon sales reform. Stymied by Congress' inaction on gun control, the president asked his advisers in recent months to examine new ways he could use his executive authority to tighten gun rules unilaterally without needing congressional approval after multiple mass shootings generated outrage nationwide. One option was a regulatory change to require more dealers to get a license to sell guns, a move that would trigger more background checks on buyers. The White House had drafted a proposal on that issue previously but was concerned it could be challenged in court and would be hard to enforce. Guns are a potent issue in U.S. politics. The right to bear arms is protected by the U.S. Constitution, and the National Rifle Association, the top U.S. gun rights group, is feared and respected in Washington for its ability to mobilize gun owners. Congress has not approved major gun-control legislation since the 1990s. Obama he was confident his new measures were constitutionally sound. They would not prevent every mass shooting or violent crime, he said, but they did have the potential to save lives. The president's planned use of executive action launches his final year with a move that Republicans say exemplifies misuse of his powers. Congress, which is controlled by Republicans, rejected Obama's proposals for legislation to tighten gun rules in 2013. "While we don’t yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will," Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan said in a statement. "This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it." U.S. states have taken their own approaches to addressing gun violence. Texas legalized openly carrying handguns, while New York and Connecticut have banned high-capacity magazines. In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the rights of individual Americans to keep and bear arms. But the court also recognized that laws imposing conditions on commercial guns sale can be consistent with the Second Amendment. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 16, 2016, 07:28:13 pm Homeowner Plugs Two Thugs Robbing Him
"If I hadn't had the gun, this news story would be about me and my mother being dead." A man in Dekalb County, Georgia is thankful today for the presence of a gun in his home, crediting that fact with saving his own life and his mother's after two men forced their way into his home and began beating them and demanding money. From ABC station WTVM: "When I opened the door, these two guys stormed in with guns and started pistol-whipping me and took me to the ground," said Hernandez. One of the intruders went after his mother, who was trying to escape. "He started pistol whipping and kicking her in the side," he said. The son's attacker demanded money and forced him through the house at gunpoint. He took him to a guest bedroom and threw him to the ground. "He put a gun to my head,” Hernandez said, “and I just started fighting back." Hernandez said it just so happened that his father's old hunting rifle was stashed away in that guest room. Hernandez had been thinking about refinishing it. During the scuffle, Hernandez managed to grab the rifle, and he started firing. Bullets struck both men. Wounded, they both fled the house. One collapsed dead in a neighbor's yard. The other man hopped in a getaway car, but later collapsed in the parking lot of a Zaxby's restaurant. He remained in critical condition until passing Thursday from his wounds. This is what freedom to defend oneself looks like. This freedom is what is under threat from gun control nuts in America. As Hernandez put it: "I feel like if I hadn't had the gun in there, this whole news story would be about me and my mother being dead in this house," he said. The right to defend oneself is absolute. The right to do so with a gun is God-given and constitutionally guaranteed. The left doesn't see it that way. One wonders what Hernandez and his mother would have done a couple of years into a gun-grabbing Hillary administration. Died, probably. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/your-feel-good-story-day-homeowner-plugs-two-thugs-robbing-him Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 21, 2016, 04:32:42 pm President Obama Sued in Federal Court Over Executive Gun Control
“The President cannot simply announce sweeping new rules and implement them by giving a speech or issuing an executive memorandum” The founder of a conservative political watchdog group is the first in the nation to file a lawsuit against the federal government over President Obama’s recent executive actions on gun control. Claiming the president cannot redefine laws enacted by Congress, Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit in federal district court on Monday naming Obama, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Deputy Director of the Department of Justice, Thomas E. Brandon, as defendants. “The Defendants’ rewriting of laws burdening and abridging the fundamental rights of the Plaintiff and other US citizens under the Second Amendment by the President and his executive branch is unconstitutional,” the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida states. “These actions are unconstitutional abuses of the President’s and executive branch’s role in our nation’s constitutional architecture and exceed the powers of the President as set forth in the U.S. Constitution.” The complaint argues Obama’s executive actions attempt to redefine ATF enforcement activities and policies, including “who is a ‘dealer’ in firearms ‘engaged in the business of selling firearms,’” according to a press release regarding the lawsuit. “The change of interpretation now sweeps up persons who do not seek to earn a livelihood or make a profit, who buy or sell as few as one or two guns a year,” the press release says. “Worse, the new rules are so vague and subjective that Klayman challenges them as ‘void for vagueness.’ Being treated as a dealer now creates the obligation to conduct background checks for those sales.” The lawsuit is in response to the January 4 announcement from President Obama where he stated he would unilaterally implement further infringements on the Second Amendment. Check out the rest of Freedom Watch’s complaint below: http://www.infowars.com/president-obama-sued-in-federal-court-over-executive-gun-control/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 27, 2016, 09:07:44 pm Health Dept Task Force Recommends Mental Illness Screenings for All U.S. Adults
Depression, suicide and gun ownership. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an influential panel appointed by the Department of Health and Human Services, has released its recommendation that all U.S. adults over the age of 18 undergo a mental illness evaluation as part of their regular health check-ups. According to a statement released Monday: The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the general adult population, including pregnant and postpartum women. Screening should be implemented with adequate systems in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate follow-up. The USPSTF assigns a grade letter, A-D, to each of its recommendations. The mental health profile received a "B," meaning: "There is high certainty that the net benefit is moderate or there is moderate certainty that the net benefit is moderate to substantial." To that end, the USPSTF looked at depression as not only a significant health problem in the U.S., but also the economic impact. Official numbers show that nearly $23 billion was spent on depression treatment in 2009, along with another $23 billion in 2011 based on lost productivity cost. The report makes a recommendation that all adults should be screened at least once, though the "optimal frequency of such screening has not been established." Thus the "B" grade; the panel is only "moderately" certain that blanket screenings could bring those billions down. However, that score does qualify the screenings for coverage under Obamacare. Mental illness is a hot topic these days, especially in regard to President Obama's latest push for gun control earlier this month. With executive actions aimed at getting guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, the timing of this report's release is rather curious. It seems reasonable to assume that mass screenings will produce more diagnoses of depression, even for those patients who showed up a little blue that day. But maybe that's the point: the more people there are that can be labeled "mentally ill" (indeed a disservice to those suffering from actual mental illnesses), the less gun permits approved. The task force is made up of 16 volunteer medical experts and describes itself as "independent of the U.S. Government" and notes that any recommendations "should not be construed as an official position of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services." http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/health-dept-task-force-recommends-mental-illness-screenings-all-us-adults Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 13, 2016, 11:20:44 am http://www.torontosun.com/2016/02/12/two-shot-at-high-school-in-phoenix-suburb-police-say
2/12/16 2 girls killed in murder-suicide at Arizona high school: Police GLENDALE, Ariz. -- A shooting at a suburban Phoenix high school that killed two 15-year-old girls and caused panic among parents was a murder-suicide, police said. Police announced that a suicide note was found at the scene of the shooting Friday morning near the cafeteria area of Independence High School in Glendale. They said the girls each were shot once, were declared dead at the scene and a weapon was found near the bodies. "Information gathered by detectives reveal the two girls were very close friends, appeared to also be in a relationship," Glendale police spokeswoman Tracey Breeden said in a statement Friday afternoon. It is believed nobody witnessed the shooting, Breeden said. Both teens have been identified, but Breeden said "their names will not be confirmed or released at this time by the police department due to their juvenile status." Hours before the lockdown of the school was lifted, hundreds of worried parents crowded the parking lots of nearby discount and convenience stores. One woman gnawed on her fingernails as she spoke on a cellphone, while another had tears streaming down her face. Other parents chain-smoked as they waited for news. Cheryl Rice said she went to a store after a friend called about the shooting and asked about Rice's 15-year-old daughter. But the girl called to say she was safe as Rice arrived at the store. She said it was horrible waiting for word about her child. "You don't know if it's your daughter or not. You don't know who's being bullied. You don't know who is being picked on. You don't know anything. It could be anybody," Rice said. Lanie Walter, who is a senior at the school, heard ambulances on her way to campus but didn't think much of it until her first class was locked down. When she called her parents to tell them she was safe, "my mom was actually really relieved because she was watching it on the news," she said. Parents were bused to the school to be reunited with their children. Some cut through a nearby field as they rushed toward their kids in emotional reunions. Other students who got permission from their parents left campus on their own. The Glendale Union High School District alerted parents to the shooting through emails and automatic phone calls and released information on social media, Superintendent Brian Capistran said. Students typically are not allowed to use their cellphones during lockdowns, but as calls from parents flooded the district, officials asked teachers to have students call family, Capistran said. Social workers and counsellors will be available to students and staff when school resumes Tuesday, the superintendent said. Minnie Kramer, mother of a 15-year-old student, said she rushed out of work when she got a text from her son right after the shooting, telling her that he was OK. As she waited to be reunited with her son, Kramer said she worried about whether any of his friends were harmed. "I know that my son is OK, but, emotionally, you don't know what it does, especially at 15, especially if it's someone he knew," Kramer said. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on April 20, 2016, 10:29:16 pm Study: Murders Spike in 2015 in Democrat-Run, Gun-Controlled Cities
A study released April 20 by the Brennan Center for Justice shows that the murder rate jumped 13.3 percent in America’s biggest cities during 2015. Three Democrat-run, heavily gun-controlled cities–Baltimore, Chicago, and Washington DC–“account for more than half” of the murder increase, the report admits. The study claims that the murder increase in these cities is driven by local factors rather than national trends. The Brennan Center put it thus: These serious increases seem to be localized, rather than part of a national pandemic, suggesting that community conditions remain the major factor. Notably, these three cities all seem to have falling populations, higher poverty rates, and higher unemployment than the national average. This implies that economic deterioration of these cities could be a contributor to murder increases. Again, the three cities in view–which by themselves constitute more than half the increase in murders for 2015–are run by Democrats and have been run by Democrats for decades. And another shared trait between these cities is the fact that they are heavily gun-controlled. For example, Baltimore has an “assault weapons” ban–as does the entire state of Maryland–and Chicago and DC both have “assault weapons” bans. Chicago has a “violence tax” that raises the price of every gun sold at retail in the city, and DC has a registration program which is broken down into six steps and requires more than a full page of explanation from the Metropolitan Police Department. The steps include multiple paragraph explanations for satisfying gun safety requirements, certifying that you are not legally blind, and paying a total of $94 to the DC Treasurer, none of which will impact or hinder criminals in the least. So the gun control in all three cities continue, even though the extra murders there were so high in 2015 that they represent more than half the overall increase in murders in the U.S. The Baltimore Sun reported 344 homicides in Baltimore during 2015, the Chicago Tribune reported 488 homicides in Chicago, and the MPD reported 162 homicides in DC–which was a 54 percent jump over D.C. homicides in 2014. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/04/20/study-murders-increased-2015-thanks-democrat-run-gun-controlled-cities/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on May 03, 2016, 02:49:19 pm Connecticut Governor to Sign Gun Confiscation Bill — Here Are the Key Details
Connecticut lawmakers have passed legislation to permit law enforcement to confiscate guns and ammunition from anyone accused of domestic abuse. The bill is headed to the desk of Gov. Dannel Malloy and he’s expected to sign it. Under the legislation, suspects would have 24 hours after being accused to surrender all firearms. After nearly three hours of debate, the bill was approved with a 23-13 vote amid a failed attempt by Republicans to amend the bill. The Connecticut Post explains the intention behind the legislation: The goal is to protect women from the increased lethality at a critical point in a relationship: when they are trying to leave their abusers. About 14 domestic homicides occur annually in Connecticut, half of which are caused by guns. While 5,000 temporary restraining orders are issued annually, about half result in permanent orders. The bill, which was approved last week in the House, would require court hearings within seven days and if judges decide against extending the orders, weapons would be returned within five days later. Currently, court hearings are held 14 days later. Senate President Pro Tempore Martin M. Looney argued the “possible inconvenience to gun owners” should not come at the “expense of the great danger to victims of domestic violence.” “That’s why this bill is exactly what we should be doing in this area,” he added. Though there was some opposition to the bill due to gun rights concerns, the Post reports “there was little evidence of gun-rights activists in the Capitol on Monday.” “I do believe we have to honor the Constitution, we have to honor the Second Amendment and we have to honor the rights of individuals,” Republican Sen. Rob Kane said. Multiple attempts to contact Democrats in the Connecticut Senate were unsuccessful. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/05/03/connecticut-governor-to-sign-gun-confiscation-bill-here-are-the-key-details/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 09, 2016, 05:37:57 pm http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/court-carry-concealed-weapons-public-39731110
6/9/16 Court: No Right to Carry Concealed Weapons in Public Dealing a blow to gun supporters, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday that Americans do not have a constitutional right to carry concealed weapons in public. In a dispute that could ultimately wind up before the Supreme Court, a divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said local law enforcement officials can place significant restrictions on who is allowed to carry concealed guns. By a vote of 7-4, the court upheld a California law that says applicants must cite a "good cause" to obtain a concealed-carry permit. Typically, people who are being stalked or threatened, celebrities who fear for their safety, and those who routinely carry large amounts of cash or other valuables are granted permits. "We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public," Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher wrote for the majority. The ruling overturned a 2014 decision by a three-judge panel of the same court that said applicants need only express a desire for personal safety. In a dissent, Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan said the ruling "obliterates the Second Amendment's right to bear a firearm in some manner in public for self-defense." Three other federal appeals courts have ruled similarly in the past, upholding California-like restrictions in New York, Maryland and New Jersey. In addition, another federal appeals court struck down Illinois' complete ban on carrying concealed weapons. The 9th Circuit covers nine Western states, but California and Hawaii are the only ones in which the ruling will have any practical effect. The others do not require permit applicants to cite a "good cause." Anyone in those states with a clean record and no history of mental illness can get a permit. The National Rifle Association called the ruling "out of touch." "This decision will leave good people defenseless, as it completely ignores the fact that law-abiding Californians who reside in counties with hostile sheriffs will now have no means to carry a firearm outside the home for personal protection," said NRA legislative chief Chris W. Cox. The New York-based gun control organization Everytown hailed the decision as "a major victory for public safety." The California case began in 2009, when Edward Peruta filed a legal challenge over the San Diego County sheriff's refusal to issue him a permit. Peruta said he wanted a weapon to protect himself, but the sheriff said he needed a better reason, such as that his occupation exposes him to robbery. Peruta, who is known as something of a legal gadfly, said he is neither a hunter, collector or target shooter but challenged the law because he believed it violated the Constitution. The NRA joined him in fighting the law. The San Diego Sheriff's Department said Thursday that since the 9th Circuit tossed out the law two years ago, it has received 2,463 applications from people seeking a concealed-weapon permit without having to show good cause. Sheriff's lawyer Robert Faigan said the department hasn't processed those applications and will continue to hold on to them while it waits to see what the Supreme Court does. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 14, 2016, 10:13:24 pm Jeh Johnson: Gun control is now a matter of homeland security
Just days after the massacre in an Orlando nightclub left 49 people dead and 53 wounded, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Tuesday said that gun control is now a critical element of protecting the U.S. homeland and keeping Americans safe. "We have to face the fact that meaningful gun control has to be a part of homeland security," Johnson said in an interview on "CBS This Morning." "We need to do something to minimize the opportunity for terrorists to get a gun in this country." On the issue of people on the no-fly list and various other lists being able to purchase a weapon in the U.S., Johnson said, "I believe that that's something that has to be addressed." Johnson said that President Obama is "frustrated" with the lack of action on preventing gun violence, but he's still "determined." "I thought frankly after Sandy Hook where you have schoolchildren murdered in a classroom that maybe finally this will be the tipping point and we were not able to move the needle in Congress, unfortunately," Johnson said. Efforts to make gun laws stricter have failed in Congress over the last decade. The assault weapons ban, for example, expired in 2004 and lawmakers have not renewed that legislation. Democrats on Capitol Hill have grown increasingly frustrated and on Monday evening, shouted down Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, after a moment of silence, demanding to know why the House isn't considering gun control legislation. "At this stage in the investigation, we know of no accomplices," said Johnson, who reiterated that the U.S. intelligence community believes it was not a terrorist-directed attack, but rather terrorist-inspired. In order to prevent homegrown terrorist attacks in the future, Johnson said it will require the government and the public to deepen their ties to U.S.-Muslim communities. "We're going to continue to build bridges to American-Muslim communities, not vilify them and drive them into the corners and shadows," Johnson said. FBI Director James Comey said Monday that the agency had interviewed the shooter three times between 2013 and 2014 and he was "thoroughly investigated," but the inquiries were eventually closed. The attack is now raising questions about whether the FBI made any mistakes or did anything wrong in their investigations. "I have a lot of confidence in the FBI," Johnson said on CBS. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/orlando-nightclub-shooting-jeh-johnson-gun-control-is-now-a-matter-of-homeland-security/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 15, 2016, 05:31:56 pm U.N. Human Rights Chief Says U.S. Needs 'Robust Gun Regulation'
The United Nations’ human rights chief called on the United States Tuesday to enforce more effective gun control measures in the aftermath of the Orlando terrorist attack, dismissing as “irresponsible pro-gun propaganda” the notion that firearms make societies safer. U.N. human rights commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein urged the U.S. government to live up to its obligations to protect citizens from the “horrifyingly commonplace but preventable violent attacks that are the direct result of insufficient gun control.” “Examples from many countries clearly show that a legal framework to control the acquisition and use of firearms has led to a dramatic reduction in violent crime,” said Zeid. “In the United States, however, there are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation, and every year thousands of people are killed or injured by them.” Zeid deplored what he called the ease with which individuals can buy firearms in America – “in spite of prior criminal backgrounds, drug use, histories of domestic violence and mental illness, or direct contact with extremists – both domestic and foreign.” “How many more mass killings of school-children, of co-workers, of African-American churchgoers, how many more individual shootings of talented musicians like Christina Grimmie, or politicians like Gabrielle Giffords, will it take before the United States adopts robust gun regulation?” he asked. rest: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/un-human-rights-chief-urges-robust-us-gun-control-measures-after Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 15, 2016, 06:18:03 pm U.N. Human Rights Chief Says U.S. Needs 'Robust Gun Regulation' The United Nations’ human rights chief called on the United States Tuesday to enforce more effective gun control measures in the aftermath of the Orlando terrorist attack, dismissing as “irresponsible pro-gun propaganda” the notion that firearms make societies safer. U.N. human rights commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein urged the U.S. government to live up to its obligations to protect citizens from the “horrifyingly commonplace but preventable violent attacks that are the direct result of insufficient gun control.” “Examples from many countries clearly show that a legal framework to control the acquisition and use of firearms has led to a dramatic reduction in violent crime,” said Zeid. “In the United States, however, there are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation, and every year thousands of people are killed or injured by them.” Zeid deplored what he called the ease with which individuals can buy firearms in America – “in spite of prior criminal backgrounds, drug use, histories of domestic violence and mental illness, or direct contact with extremists – both domestic and foreign.” “How many more mass killings of school-children, of co-workers, of African-American churchgoers, how many more individual shootings of talented musicians like Christina Grimmie, or politicians like Gabrielle Giffords, will it take before the United States adopts robust gun regulation?” he asked. rest: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/un-human-rights-chief-urges-robust-us-gun-control-measures-after MUSLIM UN COMMISSIONER ZEID RA’AD AL HUSSEIN CALLS FOR HIGH-POWERED GUN BAN IN UNITED STATES These last fews months of Barry Soetoro's occupation of the White House are going to be hyper-critical to the future of the Second Amendment in the United States of America. They are going to come at it with guns blazing, pun intended, and it is looking increasingly more likely that they are going to be successful at least on some levels. UN HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ZEID RA’AD AL HUSSEIN URGES U.S. TO ADOPT ROBUST GUN CONTROL MEASURES TO PRE-EMPT FURTHER KILLINGS “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.” – December 15, 1791, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution EDITOR’S NOTE: So let’s see if I have this right. When people are stabbed to death, no one bans knives. When a drunk gets behind the wheel and kills people with a car, no one bans cars, driving or alcohol. But when a Muslim terrorist who was allowed to slip through both the FBI and Homeland Security shoots people while screaming “Allahu Akbar!”, we have a gun problem. OK, I got it now, thanks. In the wake of the mass killing of 49 people by a sole gunman in a gay nightclub in Florida, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein on Tuesday urged the leadership in the United States of America to live up to its obligations to protect its citizens from the “horrifyingly commonplace but preventable violent attacks that are the direct result of insufficient gun control.” “IT IS HARD TO FIND A RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION THAT EXPLAINS THE EASE WITH WHICH PEOPLE CAN BUY FIREARMS, INCLUDING ASSAULT RIFLES, IN SPITE OF PRIOR CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS, DRUG USE, HISTORIES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND MENTAL ILLNESS, OR DIRECT CONTACT WITH EXTREMISTS – BOTH DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN,” HIGH COMMISSIONER ZEID SAID. “HOW MANY MORE MASS KILLINGS OF SCHOOL-CHILDREN, OF CO-WORKERS, OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN CHURCHGOERS — HOW MANY MORE INDIVIDUAL SHOOTINGS OF TALENTED MUSICIANS LIKE CHRISTINA GRIMMIE, OR POLITICIANS LIKE GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, WILL IT TAKE BEFORE THE UNITED STATES ADOPTS ROBUST GUN REGULATION? WHY SHOULD ANY CIVILIAN ANYWHERE BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE AN ASSAULT RIFLE OR OTHER HIGH-POWERED WEAPONS DESIGNED TO KILL LOTS OF PEOPLE?” THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS CHIEF ADDED. In the aftermath of the Orlando terrorist attack, President Barack Obama today called on Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban as well as pass legislation to make it harder for suspected terrorists to obtain firearms. DON’T WORRY, OBAMA ASSURES HE’S NOT AFTER YOUR GUNS: https://youtu.be/KxWso_6uwLU The president said there are a number of “common sense” gun control measures that Congress should take to reduce gun violence without violating the Second Amendment, and for the first time since the deadly shooting Sunday, he enumerated several steps he wants Congress to take. “People with possible ties to terrorism who are not allowed on a plane shouldn’t be allowed to buy a gun,” Obama said, referring to “no fly, no buy” legislation pending on Capitol Hill that would prevent any suspected terrorists on no-fly lists from buying firearms. These last fews months of Barry Soetoro’s occupation of the White House are going to be hyper-critical to the future of the Second Amendment in the United States of America. They are going to come at it with guns blazing, pun intended, and it is looking increasingly more likely that they are going to be successful at least on some levels. http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/muslim-un-commissioner-zeid-raad-al-hussein-calls-high-powered-gun-ban-united-states/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 15, 2016, 07:01:14 pm http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-oreilly-takes-stunning-stance-154449244.html
Bill O'Reilly takes stunning stance on guns after Orlando massacre 6/15/16 Bill O'Reilly stunned many viewers Tuesday night when he called for some measures of gun control to be implemented after the terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida, that claimed the lives at least 49 people — the deadliest mass shooting in US history. After criticizing liberal politicians for not being aggressive enough on the fight against the Islamic State terrorist group, the Fox News host addressed the "right-wing responsibility" after the attack carried out by 29-year-old Omar Mateen using an assault weapon and a handgun. "There is too much gun crime in the USA, and high-powered weaponry is too easy to get," he said. "That's the fact. So let's deal with it. We all have the right to bear arms, but we don't have the right to buy and maintain mortars. Even if you feel threatened by gangsters or a New World Order. No bazookas, no Sherman tanks, no hand grenades." "That's because the Second Amendment clearly states the government has a right to regulate militias, made up of individuals," he continued. "They have that right in the name of public safety. Therefore, Congress should debate what kind of weapons should be available for public sale. And the states, the individual states, should decide what kind of carry laws are good for their own people." O'Reilly said new laws were "definitely needed" in the face of new terrorist threats and mass murders. "The FBI and other federal agencies need the power to stop suspected terrorists or other evildoers from buying weapons," he said. "That law needs to be very precise." "Also, gun dealers all across America should be required to report the sale of certain kinds of guns, heavy weapons, directly to the FBI," he continued. "Not handguns, not talking about that, but other weapons that would be defined by Congress. That is a sane approach and would make it a lot tougher for the Omar Mateens of the world to get the weaponry to kill." The remarks represented a shift to the political left from where O'Reilly stood on the issue in January, when President Barack Obama announced executive actions aimed at gun control after the San Bernardino, California, terrorist attack. Back then, the news personality advocated tougher criminal sentences for those who commit gun crimes but no laws limiting the purchasing of weapons. "The truth is, terrorists are not going to submit themselves to background checks — neither are dangerous felons or insane people," he said during his January 6 program. "They are not going to sign any paper when they buy a gun. Do we all get that? They will buy their guns on the black market. And no registration law will prevent that." On Tuesday, Fox News host Gretchen Carlson also expressed similar newfound gun-control sentiment. "Every time we have a mass shooting we talk about guns. Right? Yes," she said. "The Orlando massacre was terror. But there's no doubt that Omar Mateen was able to kill so many people because he was firing an AR-15, a military-style assault weapon, a weapon easier to buy in the state of Florida than buying a handgun." "Do we need AR-15s to hunt and kill deer?" Carlson asked. "Do we need them to protect our families? Yes, I'm in favor of people being able to carry. I think some of these mass shootings would have been less deadly if that were the case. But I'm also with the majority today taking a stand. Can't we hold true the sanctity of the Second Amendment while still having common sense?" Senate Democrats are making a renewed push to pass a bill barring people on the terror watch list from buying weapons. That bill was shot down late last year on a virtual party-line vote. During a Monday conference call, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York said that if the bill were passed when first brought before the Senate in December, the Orlando terrorist attack would have been avoided. In December, just one day after the San Bernardino attack, Senate Republicans rejected the bill stopping suspected terrorists from buying weapons. The counterargument to the bill is that, since people can be placed on a terror watch list — such as the no-fly list — without due process, then a citizen could be wrongly stripped of his or her Second Amendment right. The bill failed on a 54-45 vote. Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump expressed openness to discussing such legislation in a Wednesday tweet. "I will be meeting with the NRA, who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no-fly list, to buy guns," he wrote. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 16, 2016, 04:56:13 am GIVE UP YOUR GUNS? DRUDGE TAKES ON DHS: 'YOU GO FIRST!'
Agency also worried 'right wing extremists' pose same threat as 'Islamic extremists' Just months after Department of Homeland Security advisers claimed “the threat from right-wing extremists domestically is just as real as the threat from Islamic extremism,” DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson is now suggesting his department should be in charge of implementing gun control. But media pioneer Matt Drudge reacted to Johnson’s comments with his own demand. He insisted the DHS secretary give up his own guns first. “Homeland Jeh says Give up Your Guns!” Drudge tweeted Wednesday. “You go first, Brah.” As WND reported, after the terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida, Johnson told CBS News’ “This Morning” on June 14 that he believes implementing gun control in America is critical to protecting homeland security. “We have to face the fact that meaningful, responsible gun control has to be part of homeland security as well, given the prospect of homegrown, home-born violent extremism in this country,” Johnson said. Has our own government already surrendered to Islamic jihad? A national security insider uncovers the terrible truth. Philip Haney’s “See Something, Say Nothing” is available now from the WND Superstore. “We need to do something to minimize the opportunities for terrorists to get a gun in this country, and this is now something that is critical to homeland security as well as public safety,” he told the show. He also argued that another issue “that has to be addressed” is stopping Americans on the federal no-fly list from buying guns. WND also reported that there’s a pending public comment period for a proposed rule that would strip gun rights from an estimated four million or more Americans, without any adjudication. President Obama’s newest plan would be to abruptly take Second Amendment rights away from a vast class of Social Security and government benefit recipients – anyone with help managing their government benefits and a wide range of other individuals. The change would make it a crime, instantly, for those individuals to have guns. “The regulation promises to aggressively search for and take away the gun rights of Social Security Disability recipients with PTSB, ADHD, post partem depression, Alzheimer’s, etc.,” a report from Gun Owners of America said. Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network. Also this week came news of the DHS comments concerning right-wing extremists, which were made during the Homeland Security Advisory Council’s January meeting – only one month after Muslim terrorists Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik killed 14 Americans in an attack in San Bernardino, California, in December 2015. “Member [Austin Police Chief Art] Acevedo reminded the Council that the threat from right-wing extremists domestically is just as real as the threat from Islamic extremism,” the official meeting minutes state. Johnson apparently agreed with Acevedo’s sentiments, the official records noted. “Secretary Johnson agreed and noted that CVE (the Subcommittee on Combating Violent Extremism), by definition, is not focused solely on one religion,” the minutes say. That’s when another council member, Cardinal Point Strategies CEO Paul Goldenberg, chimed in: “Member Goldenberg seconded Member Acevedo’s remarks and noted the importance of online sites in right wing extremist communities, not only in America but worldwide.” Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/give-up-your-guns-drudge-takes-on-dhs-you-go-first/#Ua0fwbZkVo1H2K3J.99 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 20, 2016, 07:19:56 pm http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/chicago-records-300th-homicide-with-13-over-fathers-day-weekend/ar-AAhl6Cv?ocid=spartandhp
6/20/16 Chicago records 300th homicide with 13 over Father's Day weekend CHICAGO — Chicago recorded its 300th homicide this weekend and tallied six others over a 60-hour period that saw 55 people shot, 13 fatally, from Friday afternoon through early Monday morning. So far this year, close to 1,800 people have been shot across the city and more than 200 of those wounded have died from their wounds, according to records kept by the Chicago Tribune. A total of 306 people have been killed this year, by shooting, stabbing or other means. A 3-year-old boy was among the wounded who survived the weekend shootings. Police said he’s in critical condition. The 3-year-old was shot in the right shoulder near East 61st Street and South Kimbark Avenue in the Woodlawn neighborhood at 6:15 p.m. Sunday, police said. The boy was in a car seat when an unknown attacker fired shots at the car, police said. People in the vehicle managed to get the boy to University of Chicago Medical Center. He was then transferred to Comer Children’s Hospital in critical condition. Five people were fatally shot and nine others were hurt between Friday afternoon and Saturday morning. Four of the fatalities occurred in seven hours. The fatalities included a 16-year-old boy who was killed in West Englewood about 9:05 p.m. Friday. He was in the front passenger seat of a car driving through an alley in the 6500 block of South Hamilton Avenue when two males came up and fired shots, according to police. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 20, 2016, 07:21:57 pm http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-divided-senate-answers-orlando-with-gridlock-on-gun-curbs/ar-AAhjQO4?ocid=spartandhp
A divided Senate answers Orlando with gridlock on gun curbs 6/20/16 WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Senate blocked rival election-year plans to curb guns on Monday, eight days after the horror of Orlando's mass shooting intensified pressure on lawmakers to act but knotted them in gridlock anyway — even over restricting firearms for terrorists. In largely party-line votes, rejected were one proposal from each side to keep extremists from acquiring guns and another shoring up the government's existing system of required background checks for many firearms purchases. With the chamber's visitors' galleries unusually crowded for a Monday evening — including people wearing orange T-shirts saying #ENOUGH gun violence — each measure fell short of the 60 votes needed to progress. Democrats called the GOP proposals unacceptably weak while Republicans said the Democratic plans were overly restrictive. The stalemate underscored the pressure on each party to give little ground on the emotional gun issue going into November's presidential and congressional elections. It also highlighted the potency of the National Rifle Association, which urged its huge and fiercely loyal membership to lobby senators to oppose the Democratic bills. "Republicans say, 'Hey look, we tried,'" said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "And all the time, their cheerleaders, the bosses at the NRA, are cheering them." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the Orlando shootings — in which the FBI says the American-born gunman swore allegiance to a leader of the Islamic State group — show the best way to prevent attacks by extremists is to defeat such groups overseas. "Look, no one wants terrorists to be able to buy guns or explosives," McConnell said. He suggested that Democrats were using the day's votes "as an opportunity to push a partisan agenda or craft the next 30-second campaign ad," while Republicans wanted "real solutions." That Monday's four roll-call votes occurred at all was testament to the political currents buffeting lawmakers after gunman Omar Mateen's June 12 attack on a gay nightclub. The 49 victims who died made it the largest mass shooting in recent U.S. history, topping the string of such incidents that have punctuated recent years. The FBI said Matteen — a focus of two terror investigations that were dropped — described himself as an Islamic soldier in a 911 call during the shootings. That let gun control advocates add national security and the specter of terrorism to their arguments for firearms curbs, while relatives of victims of past mass shootings and others visiting lawmakers and watching debate from the visitors' galleries. GOP senators facing re-election this fall from swing states were under extraordinary pressure. One, Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., voted Monday for the Democratic measure to block gun sales to terrorists, a switch from when she joined most Republicans in killing a similar plan last December. She said that vote — plus her support for a rival GOP measure — would help move lawmakers toward approving a narrower bipartisan plan, like one being crafted by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. Monday's votes came after Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., led a near 15-hour filibuster last week demanding a Senate response to the Orlando killings. Murphy entered the Senate shortly after the December 2012 massacre of 20 first-graders and six educators in Newtown, Connecticut, but that slaughter and others have failed to spur Congress to tighten gun curbs. The last were enacted in 2007, when the background check system was strengthened after that year's mass shooting at Virginia Tech. With Mateen's self-professed loyalty to extremist groups and his 10-month inclusion on a federal terrorism watch list, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., proposed letting the government block many gun sales to known or suspected terrorists. People buying firearms from federally licensed gun dealers can currently be denied for several reasons, chiefly for serious crimes or mental problems, but there is no specific prohibition for those on the terrorist watch list. That list currently contains around 1 million people — including fewer than 5,000 Americans or legal permanent residents, according to the latest government figures. No background checks are required for anyone buying guns privately online or at gun shows. The GOP response to Feinstein was an NRA-backed plan by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. It would let the government deny a sale to a known or suspected terrorist — but only if prosecutors could convince a judge within three days that the would-be buyer was involved in terrorism. The Feinstein and Cornyn amendments would require notification of law enforcement officials if people, like Mateen, who'd been under a terrorism investigation within the past five years were seeking to buy firearms. Republicans said Feinstein's proposal gave the government too much unfettered power to deny people's constitutional right to own a gun. They also noted that the terrorist watch list has historically mistakenly included people. Democrats said the three-day window that Cornyn's measure gave prosecutors to prove their case made his plan ineffective. The Senate rejected similar plans Feinstein and Cornyn proposed last December, a day after an attack in San Bernardino, California, killed 14 people. Murphy's rejected proposal would widely expand the requirement for background checks, even to many private gun transactions, leaving few loopholes. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, defeated plan increased money for the background check system. Like Murphy's measure, it prodded states to send more records to the FBI, which operates the background check system, of felons and others barred from buying guns. Grassley's proposal also revamped language prohibiting some people with mental health issues from buying a gun. Democrats claimed that language would roll back current protections. Monday's votes were 53-47 for Grassley's plan, 44-56 for Murphy's, 53-47 for Cornyn's and 47-53 for Feinstein's — all short of the 60 needed. Separately, Collins was laboring to fashion a bipartisan bill that would prevent people on the no-fly list — with just 81,000 names— from getting guns. There were no signs Monday that it was getting wide support or would receive a vote. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 25, 2016, 12:17:00 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsidht3X6kI
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on June 25, 2016, 04:57:40 pm Welcome to N@zi Germany
Hawaii becomes first U.S. state to place gun owners on FBI database Hawaii's governor signed a bill making it the first U.S. state to place its residents who own firearms in a federal criminal record database and monitor them for possible wrongdoing anywhere in the country, his office said. The move by gun control proponents in the liberal state represents an effort to institute some limits on firearms in the face of a bitter national debate over guns that this week saw Democratic lawmakers stage a sit-in at the U.S. House of Representatives. Hawaii Governor David Ige, a Democrat, on Thursday signed into law a bill to have police in the state enroll people into an FBI criminal monitoring service after they register their firearms as already required, his office said in a statement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation database called "Rap Back" will allow Hawaii police to be notified when a firearm owner from the state is arrested anywhere in the United States. Hawaii has become the first U.S. state to place firearm owners on the FBI's Rap Back, which until now was used to monitor criminal activities by individuals under investigation or people in positions of trust such as school teachers and daycare workers "As you can imagine, the NRA finds this one of the most extreme bills we've ever seen," said Amy Hunter, a spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association's institute for legislative action. The law could affect gun owners outside Hawaii, because the state requires visitors carrying guns to register, Hunter said. As a result, they could be added to "Rap Back" with no clear protocol for being removed, she said. Hawaii state Senator Will Espero, a Democrat and a co-author of the law who owns a gun, called the law "common sense legislation that does not hurt anyone." The law, which takes effect immediately, allows police in Hawaii to evaluate whether a firearm owner should continue to possess a gun after being arrested. "This bill, it doesn't even say your gun will automatically be taken away, it just means local police will be notified," Espero said in a phone interview. Ige's office said he also signed into law two other firearms bills. One makes convictions for stalking and sexual assault among the criminal offenses disqualifying a person from gun ownership. The other requires firearm owners to surrender their weapons if diagnosed with a mental, behavioral or emotional disorder. https://www.yahoo.com/news/hawaii-becomes-first-u-state-place-gun-owners-210248882.html?ref=gs Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 27, 2016, 01:48:07 pm https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-upholds-gun-restrictions-domestic-abusers-173104005.html?ref=gs
Supreme Court upholds gun restrictions for domestic abusers 6/27/16 The Supreme Court ruled Monday to uphold a federal law that prohibits those convicted of domestic violence from owning guns, regardless of whether the violence was premeditated or not. The case in question involved two Maine men who claimed they should not be barred from owning firearms after pleading guilty to hitting their partners. Both men had been charged with possessing guns while having past domestic abuse misdemeanor convictions. The justices rejected arguments from the men that the law only covers premeditated acts of abuse, not acts of abuse committed in the heat of an argument. "A person who assaults another recklessly ‘use[s ]’ force, no less than one who carries out that same action knowingly or intentionally," wrote Justice Elena Kagan, who authored the majority opinion. Justice Kagan was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito for a 6-2 ruling. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Clarence Thomas dissented. "We treat no other constitutional right so cavalierly," said Justice Thomas in his dissent. "In construing the statute before us expansively so that causing a single minor reckless injury or offensive touching can lead someone to lose his right to bear arms forever, the court continues to relegate the Second Amendment to a second-class right." Thomas's dissent reflected the views of some gun rights groups, who argued that the men shouldn't lose their constitutional right to bear arms because of misdemeanor abuse convictions. The ruling was applauded by advocates for victims of domestic abuse. According to one study, domestic violence victims are five times more likely to be killed if their abuser has access to a gun. Some advocates, such as Judge Judy Harris Kluger, executive director of Sanctuary for Families, said that while the ruling is a good step, loopholes in current gun laws still allow convicted abusers to access firearms with relative ease. "Today’s ruling is an important victory," she told the Huffington Post in a statement, "but without mandatory background checks on all gun purchasers, domestic abusers still can legally obtain guns without further scrutiny." This report contains material from the Associated Press. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 02, 2016, 09:34:22 pm http://overpassesforamerica.com/?p=31140
WHILE NOBODY WAS PAYING ATTENTION, KERRY SIGNS U.N. GUN BAN TREATY #o4a #RT #2A 6/30/16 If U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has his way the United Nations will be able to say if Americans are allowed to have their Second Amendment rights. He signed an anti-gun treaty with the United Nations that the U.S. Senate has already said it is against. The treaty Kerry signed without authorization from the Senate would create an un-Constitutional registry of all US gun buyers and would lead to the UN controlling American’s gun rights. Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on July 03, 2016, 01:02:27 pm 'Gun Free' Zone Tennessee Business Liable for Disarming Concealed Carry Holders
"This bill imposes a duty of care." Tennessee law now dictates that businesses wishing to create a "gun-free zone" will be held liable for the safety of concealed carry permit holders. The new law, SB 1736, dictates that should any concealed carry permit holder's safety be threatened after disarming themselves to enter their place of business, then the business will be held liable. The business will also be held liable if the permit holder incurs injury while "retreating from the business to a vehicle–during an emergency–to retrieve the gun the business owner barred," according to Breitbart. Below is a a summary of SB 1736: Present law authorizes persons in control of property to post a notice that prohibits firearms on the premises. This bill imposes a duty of care on any person who posts their property to prohibit firearms whereby such person will be responsible for the safety of any handgun carry permit holder while the permit holder is on the posted premises and traversing any area to and from the premises and the location where the permit holder’s firearm is stored. The duty of care created by this bill will extend to the conduct of other invitees, trespassers, employees of the person or entity, vicious animals, wild animals, and defensible man-made and natural hazards. The bill passed the state Senate 26 to 4 earlier in March and passed the House by a vote of 77 to 13 in April. The law went into effect on July 1. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/gun-free-zone-tennessee-business-liable-disarming-concealed-carry-holders Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 10, 2016, 04:03:49 pm https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/08/10/trumps-latest-outrageous-statement-wasnt-a-gaffe-it-was-something-much-worse/?utm_term=.c6c5ca13f423
8/10/16 Trump’s latest outrageous statement wasn’t a ‘gaffe.’ It was something much worse. A day after dutifully reading a policy address to a bunch of people in suits, Donald Trump returned yesterday to his more comfortable oeuvre, the stream-of-consciousness speech delivered to his supporters. And inevitably, he said something that made journalists rewind their DVRs and Democrats leap excitedly out of their chairs. Is it possible that Trump is being treated unfairly, that we jump on every little thing he says and twist his words, making a big deal out of nothing? Sure it is. That has happened before. But in this case, the criticisms are legitimate, because this isn’t just a silly “gaffe” of the kind we waste so much time on. I’ll explain why in a moment, but for the sake of accuracy, let’s look at his full quote: Quote Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick — if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day. If, if Hillary gets to put her judges — right now we’re tied. You see what’s going on. We’re tied, ’cause Scalia, this was not supposed to happen. Justice Scalia was supposed to be around for ten more years at least, and this is what happens. That was a horrible thing. So now look at it. So Hillary essentially wants to abolish the Second Amendment. Donald Trump is not a very articulate man. So when Democrats expressed their outrage over this quote, he and his campaign could have said that while it’s understandable that some people could have interpreted his words to mean that he was encouraging gun owners to either assassinate Hillary Clinton or assassinate the judges she appoints if she becomes president, he didn’t intend to say anything of the sort. But instead of just acknowledging that the words got a little garbled, which can happen to anybody, Trump claimed that the words themselves were a perfect expression of his intent, which was to encourage people to vote in order to protect gun rights. “There can be no other interpretation. Even reporters have told me. I mean, give me a break,” he told Sean Hannity last night. He tweeted, “I said pro-2A citizens must organize and get out vote to save our Constitution!” — which is simply false. Perhaps he wishes he had said that, but it’s not remotely what he actually said. But should we actually care? The answer is yes, for a couple of reasons. First, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that this is all in the service of a ridiculous lie Trump repeats every time he discusses the issue of guns. He’ll always say some version of “Hillary Clinton wants to take your guns away and she wants to abolish the Second Amendment” (yes, that’s a quote), when the truth is that Clinton has never proposed repealing the Second Amendment, nor has she ever proposed some kind of grand gun confiscation. You can read her position on this issue here, but it comes down to expanded background checks, a new assault-weapons ban, and a couple of other relatively minor things. You can disagree with her on the particulars, but it’s not abolishing the Second Amendment; whenever she is asked about it, she says that reasonable restrictions are not incompatible with a constitutional right to bear arms, which is what all but the most radical gun extremists agree on, and what even the conservatives on the Supreme Court have always held. The second reason the criticism of Trump’s statement is legitimate is that he himself demands that his opponent be held to a ludicrously high standard of accountability for every syllable that passes her lips, and some that even don’t pass her lips. For example, on Monday in his speech to the Detroit Economic Club, Trump said that Clinton “accidentally told the truth and said she wanted to raise taxes on the middle class.” This wasn’t off-the-cuff, mind you — it was in Trump’s prepared text. What was he referring to? A speech last week in which Clinton said “We aren’t going to raise taxes on the middle class,” something she has said approximately a zillion times before, but in some video feeds of the speech, the “aren’t” sounds a little slurred so you might hear it as “are.” But Trump just claims that she actually said “are” and has thus revealed her secret desire to raise middle-class taxes (PolitiFact gave him a “Pants on Fire” for that one). But most important, the reason Trump doesn’t get a pass on hinting that violence against politicians or judges is an appropriate response to an imagined threat to gun rights is that there’s a context in which this statement comes, a context created by gun advocates, by other Republicans, and by Trump himself. A candidate who tells his supporters that if they see protesters, “Knock the crap out of ’em,” or who says about one, “I’d like to punch him in the face” isn’t going to get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to advocating violence, and that’s no one’s fault but his. And Republicans at all levels frequently argue that one of the primary purposes of owning guns is so that you can use them to kill representatives of the government, whether police or soldiers, when they become too tyrannical. As Ed Kilgore reminds us, “During her successful Senate campaign in 2014, rising GOP star Joni Ernst of Iowa used to happily talk about the ‘beautiful little Smith & Wesson’ she carried with every intention of using it to defend herself and her family from ‘government, should they decide that my rights are no longer important.’ ” And she was hardly the first — we hear that kind of thing from Republicans all the time. Now combine that with the NRA’s constant warnings that if Democrats win the next election they’re coming to confiscate your guns, and everybody knows exactly what Trump was saying. His defense — that he was only encouraging people to vote — is utterly nonsensical. Remember that he said, “if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.” He was talking about what the “Second Amendment people” might be able to do about Clinton picking judges, which happens after she has already been elected. Finally, this comes after Trump has been trying to delegitimize the results of the election before it actually happens, claiming that the vote will be “rigged.” If you’re arguing to your angry, heavily armed supporters, who already think the federal government is tyrannical, that there’s a conspiracy afoot to steal the election and that your opponent will be sending jackbooted government thugs to confiscate their guns, you don’t get to pretend that when you say that the “Second Amendment people” might be able to stop the next president’s judges from subverting their gun rights that it’s all innocent and you would never contemplate something as irresponsible as encouraging violence. I’ve long been critical of coverage that focuses on “gaffes.” Usually, when candidates say something like “You didn’t build that” or that 47 percent of Americans are dependent on government and think they’re victims, we’re supposed to believe that they’ve let their mask slip and revealed their true and sinister selves, which is almost always an absurd claim. But that’s not what we’re talking about here. It doesn’t matter whether Trump really believes that people should use their guns against the federal government if it enacts policies they don’t like. What matters is that he’s encouraging them to think they should, just like he’s encouraging them not to accept the results of the election if their favored candidate doesn’t win. That’s what so malignant, and that’s what he should answer for. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 08, 2016, 04:57:40 pm http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/texas-schoolgirl-shoots-fellow-student-then-kills-herself-sheriff/ar-AAiEIiU?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
Texas schoolgirl shoots fellow student then kills herself: sheriff 9/8/16 AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - A 14-year-old girl shot and wounded a fellow student at Alpine High School in rural West Texas on Thursday and then died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, the Brewster County sheriff told reporters. The wounded girl, thought to be 16, was taken to a local hospital and is expected to survive. No names have been released and no motive has been given for the incident in the town of about 6,000 people, Sheriff Ronny Dodson said. The shooter is thought to have moved to Alpine, about 200 miles southeast of El Paso, with her family about six months ago, Dodson said. The girl was found dead in a bathroom and a pistol was recovered nearby. "It's not supposed to happen here. It has got us all in shock. This is Alpine. It is a peaceful place to live and come," Dodson said, adding, "it could have been a lot worse." The shootings prompted an evacuation of the high school and other schools were put on lockdown. Video on local media showed students consoling each other. After the shooting, the sheriff's office received threats from a man to bomb nearby Sul Ross State University and attack a hospital. Dodson said the threats were not related to the shooting and saw them as sick pranks that diverted resources at a time of crisis. "Right now, we think we have some nut who in the midst of one of our most emotional times at our school started calling in these threats," Dodson said. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 20, 2016, 03:25:38 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D6LOVeRlLg
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 31, 2016, 03:15:15 pm http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/31/opinions/trump-or-clinton-gun-control-alpers-oped/index.html
10/31/16 Trump or Clinton, stricter gun control is inevitable CNN)It's impossible to run for President without having a firm position on gun control. For every candidate in every election campaign, it inevitably becomes a dividing line. And 2016 is no different. At various stages, Donald Trump has held differing positions on the matter, but has been sufficiently in favor of protecting the second amendment to secure the support of the NRA. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, while claiming to respect the second amendment, has made clear that she wants to see tighter control on gun ownership that "tries to save some of these 33,000 lives that we lose every year." But no matter whether it's Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton who captures the White House next week, America's frightening rate of death by gunshot wounds will certainly be forced into retreat. One day. Because it is inconceivable that the people of such an advanced nation will tolerate an ever-worsening state of armed violence and insurrection, there must come a time when solutions already tested and championed by the United States are deployed to reduce the country's toll of 33,000 firearm-related deaths each year. In hindsight, how naïve were we to imagine that the massacre at Columbine High might prove to be the tipping point? Thirteen years and 421,000 American gun deaths later, even the slaughter of 26 mainly white children and teachers at Sandy Hook couldn't induce the US Congress to act. Clearly, the country's gun death toll must get worse before it gets better. But take heart, America already has the solutions. Since 1934, US federal law has mandated licensing and registration for machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and rifles. It works. Such firearms quickly became, and remain the guns least used in crime. Today, the few states that similarly regulate much more common handguns point to similar effects, even when undermined by their gun-lax neighbors. On its roads, America dramatically reversed the soaring toll of death and injury by automobile with a holistic array of evidence-based public health measures. The world followed suit. Licensing and registration did not lead to mass confiscation, and cars remain objects of maleness, power and freedom. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on January 25, 2017, 08:54:16 pm Congress Mulls Overturning Obama’s Social Security ‘Back-Door Gun Grab’
Congressional lawmakers will review a final rule issued by President Obama in December that stomps on the Second Amendment rights of Social Security beneficiaries. According to the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Obama’s Social Security rule qualifies SSI and disability insurance recipients as “mental defectives,” and therefore incapable of legally owning firearms. The rule allows those affected to file a petition for “restoration” of their Second Amendment rights, yet tens of thousands of legal gun owners must now prove “their possession of firearms would not harm public safety or the public interest, even though the government never established, or tried to establish, the contrary,” NRA-ILA added. NRA-IRA executive director Chris Cox praised Congress’ decision in a Wednesday statement. “Congress’s decision to review the Obama administration’s back-door gun grab is a significant step forward in restoring the fundamental constitutional rights of many law-abiding gun owners,” he wrote. “The NRA has been fighting this unconstitutional government overreach since it was first discussed and we look forward to swift congressional action to overturn it.” “We are pleased that Congress is moving swiftly to ensure that law-abiding Americans’ constitutional rights are respected,” he continued. “We would like to thank Reps. Sam Johnson and Ralph Abraham for leading this effort in the House, as well as with Speaker Paul Ryan for his leadership on this issue.” http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/25/congress-mulls-overturning-obamas-social-security-back-door-gun-grab/ Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 20, 2017, 03:28:44 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pssx9OW-5o0
Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 16, 2017, 06:33:28 pm http://abcnews.go.com/US/teenagers-infant-shot-alabama-churchs-easter-carnival/story?id=46825827
4/16/17 3 teenagers, 1 infant shot at Alabama church's Easter carnival Three teenagers and one infant were shot Saturday night at an Alabama church's Easter carnival, officials said. The victims' injuries are not life-threatening. Center Point Fire Chief says 800 people were at church carnival at time of shooting, another 100 in line to get in @abc3340 pic.twitter.com/BAu9ewrJVl — MelanieYuill (@melanieyuill) April 16, 2017 Center Point Fire Chief Donnie West told reporters that first responders headed to Cathedral of the Cross in Center Point -- part of the Birmingham metropolitan area -- around 9:23 p.m in response to a possible shooting. "Once we arrived, we found four victims," West said. "One was a small child less than one year of age. Three others were teenagers." The teenagers were transported to UAB Hospital's trauma center, and the baby was taken to The Children's Hospital of Alabama, both in Birmingham. It is unclear what prompted the shooting. ABC affiliate WBMA reported that 900 people -- including 100 who were waiting in line -- were at the carnival at the time of the incident. Several law enforcement agencies on scene of shooting at Cathedral of the Cross Church in Center Point @abc3340 pic.twitter.com/uzaBB1ZCEI — MelanieYuill (@melanieyuill) April 16, 2017 According to WBMA, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office has taken five people into custody for questioning. West said of those in custody, "they are just individuals of interest that [police] are talking to." The investigation is ongoing, and will be led by the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office. ABC News' Devin Villacis contributed to this report. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 31, 2017, 04:38:42 pm Breaking: 6 Dead and 49 Wounded!!!
http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=81213 5/31/17 Another tragic weekend in Chicago has passed and the body count continued to grow with no solution and no real care from the mainstream media. Allenbwest.com reported: Yes, it was another “holiday” weekend in Chicago. Over the long Memorial Day weekend, six more souls will now have memorials added for them – though their battlefield was sadly close to home. Between 6pm Friday and 3am Tuesday, 49 people were shot and wound plus six shot and killed. Tragically, this is an “improvement” over last year when 71 were shot and seven were killed. Breitbart reports, On April 24, 2017, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D) suggested the violence in gun-controlled Chicago proves the need for more gun control. He specifically pushed for more regulations on Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders. Well, of course he would, but as we’ve reported here, that’s not going to help a damn thing. During the Obama years, concealed carry permit holders soared, but the murder rate dropped by 14 percent. To date, Chicago has had 233 homicides, compared to 261 last year, a drop of 11 percent, but that’s mainly because last May was so high. In any event Mayor Emanuel, more gun control is clearly not the answer. Legal permit holders are not the cause of crime, as they’re far less likely to commit a firearm violation than even police officers. And to date in Chicago, officers have been involved in only 5 of the 233 fatal shootings, just two percent of the total. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2017, 12:40:53 pm http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/26/politics/supreme-court-guns-case/index.html?linkId=39110094
6/26/17 Supreme Court declines to take up two Second Amendment cases Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court declined Monday to take up two Second Amendment cases for next term. The first case dealt with a San Diego ordinance that required San Diego gun owners to have a good reason to carry a concealed firearm outside the home. The second case concerned two men from Pennsylvania who challenged the scope of a federal law that bans felons and some individuals charged with misdemeanors from possessing firearms. Since issuing two landmark Second Amendment decisions in 2008 and 2010, the court has largely declined to take up more cases about the scope of the constitutional protection under the Second Amendment. Gun rights advocates will be disappointed that the court once again declined to review lower court decisions that upheld local and state laws limiting the rights of gun owners. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 30, 2017, 08:47:16 am http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=84229
BREAKING! California Was Just Defeated! AP: "BREAKING: Federal judge blocks California law that would have banned magazines holding more than 10 bullets." https://twitter.com/ap/status/880577398407929856 Posted Friday, June 30, 2017 Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 07, 2017, 02:14:03 pm http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/least-two-shot-dead-baltimore-ceasefire-weekend-proves-gun-bans-dont-work/
At Least Two People Shot Dead During Baltimore ‘Ceasefire Weekend’ Proves Gun Bans Don’t Work The #BaltimoreCeasefire weekend was spearheaded by Erricka Bridgeford, who took to Facebook following the killings to assure everyone that the ceasefire was not over. Baltimore is experiencing death and violence at record levels, and it all comes just four years after adoption of stringent gun controls via the Firearm Safety Act (2013). That Act banned “high capacity” magazines, “assault weapons,” and established a registration/fingerprint requirement for would-be handgun purchasers. These were all pushed in the name of making people safer, yet the two deadliest years in Baltimore’s history were 2015 and 2016. 8/7/17 At least two people were shot dead Friday, August 4, through Sunday, August 6, a 72-hour period designated the “Nobody Kill Anybody” weekend by #BaltimoreCeasefire. EDITOR’S NOTE: Have you ever noticed that cities run by liberals that impose highly-restrictive gun bans are also those cities where gun violence is rampant? Why is that? Because gun bans and gun registration only impacts law-abiding citizens. Criminals do not “register their weapons” and apply for permits. Banning guns completely because people shoot other people is like banning free speech because people insult and threaten other people. The amendments are not the reason for the criminal activity. The only thing that happens when you can guns is that law-abiding citizens are now defenseless. The #1 killer of anyone, anywhere in America, is death by automobile. So how come no Liberals call for banning cars? Hmm… On July 12, Breitbart News reported that city residents were being urged to take the #BaltimorePeaceChallenge, pledging to go three days without shooting at each other. But according to Fox News, at least three people had been shot before the weekend ended, and two of those victims died from their wounds. Both shooting deaths occurred on Saturday. The #BaltimoreCeasefire weekend was spearheaded by Erricka Bridgeford, who took to Facebook following the killings to assure everyone that the ceasefire was not over, that “Nobody Kill Anybody” weekend would continue through Sunday. Bridgeford wrote: The #BaltimoreCeasefire has NOT ended. If you are going to run around here acting defeated, A. Part of me wants to give you this nub to your eye, and then, to hug you, and B. You are not ready for this revolution. It’s fine. But please sit down & quiet yourself. Stop panicking out loud. Find a corner & watch us keep GETTING THIS WORK. Be in awe of how nothing stops us from healing our city. Just please know that you and your misguided, “It ain’t work” perception do NOT…. I REPEAT… DO NOT get to speak for this movement. I am turning off your mic right … now. “If you want to talk about how we come from slaves who ran away, got killed… yet MORE slaves kept rising up…. YOU are a voice of this movement,” she continued. “If you understand that the 2 lives we lost to violence inspire us to #VibrateEvenHigher… YOU are a voice of this movement.” She went on to describe the “perceptions that have been shifted” and “the immeasurable hope that young people have been given” via #BaltimoreCeasefire. Baltimore is experiencing death and violence at record levels, and it all comes just four years after adoption of stringent gun controls via the Firearm Safety Act (2013). That Act banned “high capacity” magazines, “assault weapons,” and established a registration/fingerprint requirement for would-be handgun purchasers. These were all pushed in the name of making people safer, yet the two deadliest years in Baltimore’s history were 2015 and 2016. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 22, 2017, 04:26:52 pm http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=95984
BREAKING: It’s A Unanimous Vote!!! 9/21/17 California Legislature has passed a law to end rifle use in the rural areas of the state. The bill now awaits a signature by Jerry Brown!! Visaliatimesdelta.com reported: California is one step away from outlawing guns in the rural parts of the state — a big deal for Tulare County. Most people in Tulare County, though, hope the proposed law goes by the wayside. Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 05, 2017, 05:50:06 pm http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/04/gop-rep/
10/4/17 GOP Rep. Bill Flores Supports Gun Control via Bump Stock Ban Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX) is taking a stand for gun control by calling for a ban on bump stocks following Stephen Paddock’s use of the devices in the Las Vegas attack. Although Paddock used the devices criminally, Flores says “typical gun owners” do not need them either. According to the Hill, Flores said he did not know what a bump stock was until news of the Vegas attack informed him. After the attack he said, “I think they should be banned.” He said he does not know a reason why people need “to own anything that converts a semi-automatic to something that behaves like an automatic.” He added, “There’s no reason for it.” more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 05, 2017, 06:19:31 pm http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=98072
10/5/17 Those wanting to repeal the Second Amendment should read this In 2003, 6 liberal judges on the 9th Circuit Court correctly interpreted the Second Amendment as an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. Judge Alex Kozinski, one of the dissenting judges offered an elaborate, detailed analysis of the Second Amendment: (https://images1-focus-opensocial.googleusercontent.com/gadgets/proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs%2Etwimg%2Ecom%2Fmedia%2FDLY6AFiUIAAga7X%2Ejpg&container=focus) (https://images1-focus-opensocial.googleusercontent.com/gadgets/proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs%2Etwimg%2Ecom%2Fmedia%2FDLY6DxvVwAAVTn5%2Ejpg&container=focus) Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 07, 2017, 05:26:09 pm http://truthfeednews.com/lol-new-york-times-calls-for-repeal-of-2nd-amendment/
New York Times Calls for REPEAL of 2nd Amendment Breaking News By Amy Moreno October 7, 2017 Liberals continue to lose their mind over gun control and the 2nd Amendment. They have no problem with 50 blacks being slaughtered every weekend in Chicago, but as soon as a “mass shooting” happens, they want the 2nd Amendment repealed. A so-called “conservative” writer at the New York Times (ha ha ha) is calling for the repeal. Keep dreaming, bozos. Conservative New York Times columnist Bret Stephens called for a repeal of the Second Amendment in a Thursday op-ed, arguing that while gun ownership shouldn’t be outlawed, “it doesn’t need a blanket Constitutional protection, either.” Stephens’s op-ed comes in the wake of the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, when a gunman opened fire on an outdoor concert in Las Vegas on Sunday, killing at least 58 people. “I have never understood the conservative fetish for the Second Amendment,” Stephens, who is also an MSNBC contributor, writes. more Title: Re: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting Post by: Mark on March 19, 2018, 06:33:26 pm Illinois State Assembly approves gun confiscation bill The state legislature of Illinois has approved a bill, HB 1465, which: Requires 18 to 20-year-olds to hand over or transfer ownership of heretofore legally possessed “assault weapons” — which the NRA-ILA describes as commonly-owned “semi-automatic firearms” — as well as any magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. Bans the sale of certain types of semi-automatic weapons to individuals under age 21. Makes owning such a weapon by persons under age 21 a Class 3 felony for a first offense and a Class 2 felony for a second offense. The government forcing people to forfeit or hand over weapons previously deemed legal is confiscation. On February 28, 2018, the bill was passed by a vote of 64-51 in the State House of Representatives. On March 14, 2018, the Illinois State Senate passed the bill by a vote of 33-22. Both the House and Senate are controlled by a Democrat majority. HB 1465 was introduced in Illinois’ House by Rep. Michelle Mussman (D). The bill’s 23 co-sponsors are all Democrats: 16 females, 7 males. HB 1465 was introduced in Illinois’ Senate by Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago). There were 7 co-sponsors, among whom was Republican Sen. Jim Oberweis, whom the NRA had given an “A” rating in 2014. The bill deviates from the traditional military definition of assault rifle, requiring the weapon to be capable of selective fire options like three round bursts and fully-automatic, and instead defines it as any semi-automatic rifle or pistol with a belt or magazine fed system capable of more than 10 rounds or featuring a folding stock or the ability to accept tactical attachments such as scopes. The definition also includes some .50 caliber rifles. Critics of the gun confiscation bill were taken aback by “the idea that the government would confiscate property.” The bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Michelle Mussman, responded to these concerns by assuring them “authorities will not visit homes to pick up weapons.” Rather, “a first offense for getting caught with prohibited firearms would be a misdemeanor offense.” After the state Senate passed the bill, HB 1465 must go back to the House for reconciliation because the Senate added an amendment, meant to attract Republican support for the bill, which would allow individuals who owned such weapons prior to the passage of the law to use that fact as an affirmative defense when facing felony charges under the legislation. But Sen. Chapin Rose (R) told Watchdog.org that the amendment would not necessarily protect owners of the weapons from facing felony charges if they do not surrender them. He believes the bill should have exempted current owners of the weapons from facing charges, rather than just offering them an affirmative defense while under arrest. If Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) signs the bill, HB 1465 will become law. Residents under the age of 21 will have 90 days to turn over the guns and magazines. Rauner recently vetoed a bill that would have required gun retailers to be licensed by the state, claiming that to be “unnecessary, burdensome regulation.” Gubernatorial vetoes can be overturned by a three-fifths majority vote in both houses of the Illinois General Assembly. Illinois also recently passed other gun control bills in addition to the gun confiscation HB 1465: The Illinois State Senate passed HB 1467, which bans bump stocks and trigger cranks, and added an amendment to that bill allowing localities to ban what it defines as assault weapons, potentially creating different gun laws on a town-by-town basis in Illinois. The Illinois House of Representatives passed HB 1468, which would impose a 72-hour waiting period on purchases of items defined as assault weapons. The Senate has yet to vote on the measure. Sources: https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2018/03/19/illinois-state-assembly-approves-gun-confiscation-bill/ |