Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans? page 230

5864 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by Stryker2342:

I’m fairly liberal, also an Infantryman in the Army. Definately against taking any guns away. I don’t think you should assume that all liberals are anti gun. I mean, Bush wanted to renew the assault weapons ban in 2004. Romney banned weapons in Massachusetts. That should tell you something right there.

Let me be fair Stryker, I know a lot of democrats who shoot firearms, use them for self-defense, and some collect them. Not all democrats wish to do away with firearms and many of them are rated A by the NRA political ratings. However, when talk of gun-control comes up, it is usually initiated by the Democrat side. Politicians like Joe Biden, Nancy Polosi (sp), etc. Bill Clinton is a big gun control democrat. Democrats have been quiet on the gun control issue as of late. The only mention of it was the Aurora Theater shooting, but they backed off when the public said no. Obama has not done very much toward his anti-gun agenda because he is/was waiting for his second term. He did tell NATO he would sign on with the SAT but congress shut him down on that.

Bush was not a fan of gun control per seh but did have a few things he would like to have seen become laws. The second amendment is a thorn in the side of our government because it prevents them from pushing forward their political agendas. Some of the claims they have made really tick me off, such as calling all soldiers potential terrorists, to be feared and watched. Some of the state laws tick me off too. In my state they make soldiers take a hunter safety course before they can hunt deer. Really?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Obama has not done very much toward his anti-gun agenda because he is/was waiting for his second term.

Because he has an anti-gun agenda now?

Some of the claims they have made really tick me off, such as calling all soldiers potential terrorists, to be feared and watched.

Because PTSD isn’t a real big deal.

Some of the state laws tick me off too. In my state they make soldiers take a hunter safety course before they can hunt deer. Really?

Yes really, you going to start getting pissy about good students having to take the same standardized test as the other kids?

 
Flag Post

Obama always has had an agenda. It’s no secret. He had F ratings in the senate the short time he was there. He hasn’t tried to hide it, but he hasn’t done anything with it because it is a career killer and has been for several years now.

Not every soldier comes home with PSTD. What are they going to do to the deer if they do have PSTD, throw a grenade at it? Kill it? Oh wait, that is what you do when you hunt.

You can handle that issue on your own as I already have my hands full with my issues.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Obama always has had an agenda. It’s no secret.

So he’s openly admitted to an anti-gun agenda, then?

He had F ratings in the senate the short time he was there.He hasn’t tried to hide it, but he hasn’t done anything with it because it is a career killer and has been for several years now.

Could you point out where you found that out, because not even Wikipedia says anything about it. Not that I could find, at least.

Not every soldier comes home with PSTD.

No shit? Kinda why people do a psych evaluation to see if they do, and if so, then they need to be treated.

 
Flag Post

He started to after the Aurora shootings but then he backed off. He hasn’t tried to really hide it, he just hasn’t advertised it. I’m not surprised at it, I halfway expected it.

I’m sorry, I should have made that F rating more clear. The NRA rates politicians at election time by their voting records and answers they give on a survey sent to them. They then will endorse politicians with an A or B rating. I have seen them endorse democrats over republicans because of their voting records.

No kidding? Tell me something, why are you so distrusting of soldiers? Whenever the subject comes up you seem a bit disturbed with the idea that soldiers have been in action and may come home with terrible memories and experiences. The large majority of them get over most of it and live normal lives. When soldiers need help they will try to seek it. Sometimes they get it and sometimes Uncle Sam turns their back on them. What has this got to do with the simple enjoyment of going hunting for a deer or whatever? Explain this to me.

 
Flag Post

WH Smith requires an ID in Britain to buy a shooting or hunting magazine!
http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/shoo…ail/story.html

Another UK home SD shooting. Residents arrested after shooting burglars. Couple renting farm cottage shoot two burglars and then are arrested for causing “grievous bodily harm.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne…break-ins.html

The article also talks about a millionaire who fought back against a knife wielding assailant after his family where tied up. The millionaire spent 2 and 1/2 years in jail for it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

He started to after the Aurora shootings but then he backed off. He hasn’t tried to really hide it, he just hasn’t advertised it. I’m not surprised at it, I halfway expected it.

Then he hasn;t “always” had an anti-gun agenda.

I’m sorry, I should have made that F rating more clear. The NRA rates politicians at election time by their voting records and answers they give on a survey sent to them. They then will endorse politicians with an A or B rating. I have seen them endorse democrats over republicans because of their voting records.

Obligatory crack at NRA’s NRA-ness.

No kidding? Tell me something, why are you so distrusting of soldiers?

I am?

Whenever the subject comes up you seem a bit disturbed with the idea that soldiers have been in action and may come home with terrible memories and experiences.

How? All I’m saying is that there are solders who do get PTSD, and should get treatment for it, and all the (evil) gubment is doing is saying that those with untreated PTSD or other mental instablility are a danger if shit were to hit the fan.

The large majority of them get over most of it and live normal lives.

And that’s a good thing.

When soldiers need help they will try to seek it.

Which is… Exactly what I was saying.

What has this got to do with the simple enjoyment of going hunting for a deer or whatever? Explain this to me.

You’re the one who made that connection in this first place.

Originally posted by jhco50:

Here we go again. I wonder why Kong doesn’t fix that stupid program?

I don’t think mashing the broken button helps…

But anyway, I can’t quite tell what you’re point is with those links, though that might be because of Kong’s wierd formatting for the post viewed page.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by jhco50:

He started to after the Aurora shootings but then he backed off. He hasn’t tried to really hide it, he just hasn’t advertised it. I’m not surprised at it, I halfway expected it.

Then he hasn;t “always” had an anti-gun agenda.

I’m sorry, I should have made that F rating more clear. The NRA rates politicians at election time by their voting records and answers they give on a survey sent to them. They then will endorse politicians with an A or B rating. I have seen them endorse democrats over republicans because of their voting records.

Obligatory crack at NRA’s NRA-ness.

No kidding? Tell me something, why are you so distrusting of soldiers?

I am?

Whenever the subject comes up you seem a bit disturbed with the idea that soldiers have been in action and may come home with terrible memories and experiences.

How? All I’m saying is that there are solders who do get PTSD, and should get treatment for it, and all the (evil) gubment is doing is saying that those with untreated PTSD or other mental instablility are a danger if shit were to hit the fan.

The large majority of them get over most of it and live normal lives.

And that’s a good thing.

When soldiers need help they will try to seek it.

Which is… Exactly what I was saying.

What has this got to do with the simple enjoyment of going hunting for a deer or whatever? Explain this to me.

You’re the one who made that connection in this first place.

I will try to get a post through One more time.

Yes, he has always had the agenda. He has not advertised it since being in office as it is a as I said a career killer. He wants a second term. If your boss told you you would get fired if you used a blue pen instead of a black one, would you use the blue pen?

I didn’t make any mention of soldiers having PTSD while applying for a hunting license. My state demands they take a hunter safety course as if they are ignorant of firearms and the danger of unsafe handling, yet these boys have been trained to use their firearms efficiently by the military. It’s like, what are you going to teach them they don’t already know?

You know what the majority of regulations and laws are really about? Money. Think about that. What does everything come down to? Money.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

I will try to get a post through One more time.

Yes, he has always had the agenda. He has not advertised it since being in office as it is a as I said a career killer.

Then how can you say that he’s always had it?

If your boss told you you would get fired if you used a blue pen instead of a black one, would you use the blue pen?

Yes, so I could sue his ass.

I didn’t make any mention of soldiers having PTSD while applying for a hunting license.

Neither did I, you’re just making the connection that I am for I don’t know what reason.

My state demands they take a hunter safety course as if they are ignorant of firearms and the danger of unsafe handling, yet these boys have been trained to use their firearms efficiently by the military.

Or because everyone should do it, so whoever’s giving them the hunting licence is less liable for suits. Well, unless the trainer’s doing a piss poor job, but that’s a different story.

It’s like, what are you going to teach them they don’t already know?

Well how long is it, because it seems like it would be pretty easy to do.

 
Flag Post

I believe it is 3 days or maybe a week, I’m not sure as I am exempt. You might say I am grandfathered in, LOL. Hunters here are really good with their equipment and skills. Most are learned skills taught to them by their father, uncle, or someone like that. It is a tradition passed down through the families most of the time. Sadly, I never hunted with my son, which is a black eye for me. It wasn’t all my fault, but much of it was. I taught him to shoot, but never took him hunting. Now I’m so damn old I don’t hunt anymore. The ground has gotten hard and cold.

Many of my friends don’t hunt with a firearm anymore, they bow hunt. Some of the bows they use are amazingly powerful. Some of them hunt black powder. These old smokers are quite accurate. When Black powder come back in the 60s and 70s we had replicas of the old Hawkins, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania rifles. Not content to make replicas, the companies have changed the rifles so much, they really are only black powder because they use that powder. People put scopes on them and all of the other accessories to the point they are just another firearm. We lost what we were after when we brought them back…the nostalgia.

Do you have anyone in your family who hunts? Have you ever hunted?

 
Flag Post

All I’m saying is that there are solders who do get PTSD, and should get treatment for it, and all the (evil) gubment is doing is saying that those with untreated PTSD or other mental instablility are a danger if shit were to hit the fan.

I think this video is an accurate representation of the dangers.

 
Flag Post

World’s most expensive bullet

This is is a .45 ACP bullet made from solid 14k white gold. Mounted in the hollow point is an amethyst surrounded by over 90 high quality diamonds.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

“This is a .45 ACP bullet made from solid 14k white gold. Mounted in the hollow point is an amethyst surrounded by over 90 high quality diamonds.”

Oh so that’s how we make bullets cost $5,000.

 
Flag Post

LOL! Ain’t it pretty?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

All I’m saying is that there are solders who do get PTSD, and should get treatment for it, and all the (evil) gubment is doing is saying that those with untreated PTSD or other mental instablility are a danger if shit were to hit the fan.

I think this video is an accurate representation of the dangers.

That’s pretty good Jan. I enjoyed it.

 
Flag Post

Yes, he has always had the agenda. He has not advertised it since being in office as it is a as I said a career killer. He wants a second term. If your boss told you you would get fired if you used a blue pen instead of a black one, would you use the blue pen?

If he hasn’t advertised it, how the hell do you know about it? Let’s see the evidence for this claim. I suspect it is simply a fabrication, as nothing Obama has done suggests any interest in the subject.

Some of the claims they have made really tick me off, such as calling all soldiers potential terrorists, to be feared and watched.

That’s a lie, jhco. One you have no excuse for repeating, as the actual report has been linked to you before, multiple times. The report says nothing about soldiers being untrustworthy, it says only that militant far right groups are targeting soldiers for recruitment because of their skills. This is pretty damn obvious. The entirety of the claim is about the intent of far right militants, and what they want.

You have no excuse for pretending that it was about soldiers being terrorists.

You know what the majority of regulations and laws are really about? Money. Think about that. What does everything come down to? Money.

Nope, they come down to dealing minimising consequences of actions for the most part.

 
Flag Post

For what it’s worth, the story JHCO was trying to post that kept falling foul of the spam filter:

Country sports enthusiasts are furious at a decision by Britain’s biggest newsagent to ban children from buying shooting magazines after a campaign by animal rights activists.

WH Smith says youngsters under 14 will not be sold shooting titles, even though it is legal to hold a shotgun licence below that age.

And even adult customers attempting to buy a magazine featuring shooting now face a humiliating alert as staff receive a “till prompt” to check the buyer’s age. The high street retailer based the policy on the qualifying age for a firearms certificate and says checks are already in place for a range of products, including scissors and adhesives “where an element of common sense” is required.

So, contrary to his original post;

a) You only need ID to buy such a title, in this one store, if you’re not ‘obviously’ over 18.
b) It’s a decision by the store, not a legal requirement in any way, shape or form.

As for the other story: Link

Two Arrested on SUSPICION of GBH after shooting at burglar… standard procedure… arrested on suspicion of GBH so it can be determined whether or not they acted in self defence through interviews, etc (Rather than arrested for GBH and charged, as JHCO implies)…

The follow up story makes interesting reading (and completely demolishes JHCO’s argument)…

In Precis:

“It’s the chance you take”, judge tells two raiders who were fired on by homeowners at isolated cottage – Burglars were injured after homeowner fired his legally-owned shotgun. Judge said injuries could not form part of sentence or defence… both burglars were convicted and sentenced to four years in prison. The homeowners concerned were released from custody without charge it having been determined that they ‘acted in reasonable self defence’.

 
Flag Post
  • Since jhco couldn’t keep it on topic in the Obamacare causes layoffs thread, we’ll move this conversation in here where it belongs.

jhco, you should re-read my post.

I suggested that the gun owners who are acting in a paranoid and ridiculous manner, out of fear of gun regulation that is likely NOT coming, are stupid hicks.

Obama has given no indication that he intends to “come after our guns”.
It’s ignorant hicks and conspiracy nuts that think he will, and they’re driving up demand for weapons and ammo as we speak, going on an ill-advised buying frenzy.

The only people/entities that benefit from this kind of paranoia are the ones manufacturing the weapons and ammunition.
Those of us (myself included) that like to shoot recreationally are going to suffer because of this paranoid and ill-informed attitude.

I also didn’t cite any political affiliation.

But whatever, if you’re just looking for some reason to insult liberals, and make veiled threats of “revolution”, then have at it.

 
Flag Post

softest_voice,,
while I agree w/ ya that his post was, indeed, very much off-topic for the Obamacare thread…
I’d like to point out the very tenuous connection he did (unknowingly?) make.

I see a very real “similarity-of-ill-information-driven-paranoia” between the angst of the radical-gunners of the NRA and those ppl who are just as equally sure that AHA is going to magically transform America into a lefty-liberal socialism which will cause a massive, house-2-house revolution on the scale of the those of L. A. in 1992 Ya might wanna insert in those images some NRA-uniformed (and other fringe, para-military groups) doing their part in maintaining order.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:When soldiers need help they will try to seek it.

Actually a lot of soldiers that do need help won’t seek it because they are so messed up; I can think of a bunch of homeless vets and stuff like that who are just too out of it to reach out for help. For some reason many are coming back ill, at least that’s the buzz around the Veterans Administration; I don’t know whether this is just a tougher war than the last ones or if it is just getting more exposure.

 
Flag Post

No Twilight, the war wasn’t worse, the deployments were. You can’t send them into a war zone over and over and over without it causing mental stress at levels unheard of. This was caused by a too small armed force covering two wars and politicians who didn’t/don’t give a shit about the soldiers.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

softest_voice,,
while I agree w/ ya that his post was, indeed, very much off-topic for the Obamacare thread…
I’d like to point out the very tenuous connection he did (unknowingly?) make.

I see a very real “similarity-of-ill-information-driven-paranoia” between the angst of the radical-gunners of the NRA and those ppl who are just as equally sure that AHA is going to magically transform America into a lefty-liberal socialism which will cause a massive, house-2-house revolution on the scale of the those of L. A. in 1992 Ya might wanna insert in those images some NRA-uniformed (and other fringe, para-military groups) doing their part in maintaining order.

The revolution, if it happens, will not be over the poor. It will be between a government that is not listening to the people and pandering to the rich and the people in the poor and middle classes who have lost all hope of having the prosperity they had before.

You have absolutely no idea of what the NRA is or does, yet you use it as a stick to swing at gun owners. I believe you are wanting to reference the ILA arm of the NRA which is made up of our lawyers and lobbing group. They are well heeled lawyers and not uniformed on any of the firearms issues. Nor do they have anything to do with any issues that don’t concern firearm’s ownership or hunting. May I suggest you forget trying to tie them to you BS.

 
Flag Post

Honestly, the liberal agenda has leads and reasons to believe that gun control reduces crimes, but a lot of evidence, specifically that which is gathered from criminal records and other details, show that gun control increases crime tyically, as opposed to stopping or reducing them.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by 12_Hundred:

Honestly, the liberal agenda has leads and reasons to believe that gun control reduces crimes,

Certain kinds, maybe.

Though this is kind of fun, I’m getting plenty of examples of why I’m not one of the fabled “uber-liberals,” whose numbers change strangely from political wing to political wing.

but a lot of evidence, specifically that which is gathered from criminal records and other details, show that gun control increases crime tyically, as opposed to stopping or reducing them.

I know that… Well, everything in your post has been mentioned to death already, but could you still give specifics?

 
Flag Post

The stealing of guns. Left-wing people ignore the fact that a vast majority of criminals get guns by stealing them. Very rarely will they ever purchase weapons to kill or loot with.