End Times and Current Events
March 29, 2024, 05:46:34 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting

Shoutbox
March 27, 2024, 12:55:24 pm Mark says: Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked  When Hamas spokesman Abu Ubaida began a speech marking the 100th day of the war in Gaza, one confounding yet eye-opening proclamation escaped the headlines. Listing the motives for the Palestinian militant group's Oct. 7 massacre in Israel, he accused Jews of "bringing red cows" to the Holy Land.
December 31, 2022, 10:08:58 am NilsFor1611 says: blessings
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
View Shout History
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 21   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Politicians respond to Connecticut school shooting  (Read 29698 times)
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #450 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."
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #451 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

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.

« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 01:05:10 am by Kilika » Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #452 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

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #453 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #454 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #455 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #456 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #457 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
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #458 on: December 18, 2013, 10:42:32 am »

from a new VC article...




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.


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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #459 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #460 on: December 18, 2013, 11:49:30 am »

And just what is that kid doing in that graphic with his hands?





Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #461 on: December 18, 2013, 11:50:04 am »

I was wondering the same thing.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #462 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #463 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #464 on: December 30, 2013, 08:17:34 am »

Don't think isn't a good thing, right? Huh

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.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #465 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #466 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? Angry
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #467 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #468 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #469 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).

Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #470 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #471 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://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/
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 12:17:48 pm by Mark » Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #472 on: January 17, 2014, 11:57:01 am »

Mark, is there a link for this article?

It's a good article, BTW.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #473 on: January 17, 2014, 12:18:09 pm »

Mark, is there a link for this article?

It's a good article, BTW.

YEP
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #474 on: January 17, 2014, 12:20:18 pm »

Thanks! Smiley

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.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #475 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #476 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #477 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #478 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."
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #479 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 21   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy