In an editorial headlined “Why Protect Shady Gun Dealers?” the New York Times recently weighed in on the side of Mayor Michael Bloomberg against the “Tiahrt amendment,” the 2003 provision supported by Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, that has restricted release of gun-trace data: “The Tiahrt amendment hinders the ability of the police and localities to see how guns move through their communities, and to act against the relatively small handful of gun dealers responsible for selling a majority of the guns used in crime.”
The editorial concluded: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she will oppose the Tiahrt amendment. Lawmakers in favor of preserving the absurd restrictions have a duty to explain why they are more interested in protecting rogue gun dealers than in protecting the public.”
And in a June 16 New York Times commentary, New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said, “Congress can help save lives by killing this awful law.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
108 Comments
Congress should be ashamed they help keep the ATF weak.
Ashamed they don’t demand some guns not be created. They failed gun control. Stop the creation and sale of weapons used for wars to the general public.
Take on the gun manufactures as a government entity and not as special interest driven individuals.
The NRA isn’t their best interest.
Senators can’t explain too many guns being in criminals hands.
They shouldn’t accept it.
Senators know many Americans will never carry a gun, some won’t have them in their homes.
Senators need to listen as cities demand they need more data to track gun sales and transfers.
How can Tiahart not listen to the police in the community he represents? When cities nationally scream the same desire. He alone is being singled out.
“How can Tiahart not listen to the police in the community he represents?”
Easy — He has no ability to HEAR..
The police in Wichita would be heard if they wrote checks larger than the NRA.
The NYT is the most far left liberal newspaper in the country. If they had their way, nobody in america except the government and thugs will be able to carry guns. So anything favoring gun control the NYT will make up a reason to support. I am sure they cherry picked a few officers who favor their view and put it in their editorial.I don’t think the NYT will care about the opinion of the Eagle when it is against one of their loony left politicians. Why can’t the editorial board and people here think independently instead of following what some lunatic newspaper feels.
So how many anti-Tiarht editorials is the Eagle going to present?
I think the Wichita Eagle is going to when the “Partial Truth Abortion” award if they keep this up.
Police…NRA, pretty much the same people. Idenity crises, anyone?
I think they saw how well their vendetta against Phill Kline worked (although Todd Tiahrt is not nearly as easy a target) and have decided to pursue Todd on whatever they can make up.
Chuckle… “Rogue gun dealers”. I smell a focus group.
Tiahrt’s law has nothing to do with the second amendment. It was written for the purpose of limiting communication between various government entities. That is something that was supposed to be addressed by the HSA.
Tiahrt,s useless law is doing nobody but criminals any good. It should be scrapped. In fact, Tiahrt should be scrapped as being a useless entity himself. Both him and da holy-roller Brownback need to be gone. Vote em out folks, they’re doing Kansdas no good at all.
“Vote em out folks, they’re doing Kansdas no good at all.”
See what I mean: they even tried to change how Kansas is spelled.
Again, when is Bloomberg going to be prosecuted for sending private investigators across state lines in attempt to illegally coerce legitimate gun dealers into selling guns using “straw purchase” tactics?
And the Eagle’s drumbeat goes on. How much has Bloomberg (billionaire media owner, and all; nah, no influence buying there) paid the Eagle to run this little lieing campaign? Never let the truth get in the way of a good lynching.
No position on firearms, you said, Brownlee.
Liar.
This myth of local LEOs not being able to get trace data – no, myth is too nice – this LIE has been beaten to death, again and again. READ THE LAW. It DOES NOT forbid local authorities from obtaining gun trace data. I’ve PERSONALLY seen such reports, requested and received local law enforcement. The goal of Bloomberg and Co. is NOT officer safety, or law enforcement; we KNOW that. That’s merely cover. Even Bloomberg admits that.
No, the goal is LAWSUIT.
And outlander, you’re exactly right. “Rogue gun dealer,” indeed. Focus group assembled, no doubt about it. Of course, Bloomberg and Co. consider ANY gun dealer a “rogue.”
I guess I’ll just have to increase my contribution to the NRA-ILA.
WE pushing Tiahrt again, oh well:
For those not already informed, below are links to two documents you should read before you make a decision on the Tiahrt amendment. (One being the actual amendment – duh!)
There is nothing in the Tiahrt amendment that prohibits tracing firearms data for a bona fide criminal investigation.
For those who want to peruse gun purchase records for any other reason (like a Bloomberg witch hunt), that is not allowed per both the Tiahrt amendment AND the 39 year-old Gun Control Act of 1968.
1)The Tiahrt amendment.http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/communications/press_releases/2007/Tiahrt_gun_amd/TIAHRT_amendment_2.pdf
2)The Gun Control Act of 1968http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/gca.htm
There you go again Eagle, if you can’t destroy the Tiahrt Amendment the first time, just keep bashing the issue to death.
All y’all bloggers get paid to post these stories? Then why does the Eagle keep paying you to post the Same Old Shit articles over and over?
That’s like the ole factory piece rate trick of double and triple counting the same dang piece and getting paid several times for making one piece!
Attn: Posters – just go back and copy and paste previous posts over and over again. See how interesting this blog would get then!
The Second Amendment is there to stop the Bloombergs in America and it’s working.
New York City has stopped being a part of the United States a long time ago, when they millionaires out of the 4 who attacked Mr. Getz and put him in jail for defending himself.
No Grand Jury would indict, no District Attorney would file, and no Jury would convict Mr. Getz in Texas and the 4 would be where they belong, in jail.
The Second Amendment comes right after the First Amendment {easy to find }.
Just ONCE I’d like to see the Eagle do an actual factual based reporting with bullet points summarizing the actual Tiahrt Amendment and the Gun Control Act of 1968.
I would bet no one at the Eagle has read either document OR they are just so anti-gun biased they intentionally write lies.
I’m with GMC70, more $$$ is needed by the NRA.
For every Tiahrt Amendment or other anti-gun post by the Wichita Eagle, send $10 more to the NRA.
That should solve this problem.
Ummm why should Bloomberg be prosecuted for sending out investigators to make illegal weapons sales?? They do that with illicit dreugs every day, and the same with prostitution… It is Bloomberg’s(and the City of NYC’s) duty to do such things!!
Typical liberal pattern…
You can always tell that something is wrong when the liberals not only push an idea, but keep increasing the rhetoric added to it:
“Why Protect Shady Gun Dealers?”
“absurd restrictions”
“…more interested in protecting rogue gun dealers than in protecting the public.”
“help save lives”
What next Rhonda? I will be waiting for the calls that if we don’t act now it may be too late!
Um, Chas, 1)The undercover cops with regard to drugs and hookers, don’t actually, ummm, shall we say consumate the transaction.
2)How often do you see undercover cops go outside of their jurisdiction – say NYC cops travelling to other states even?
3)The private detectives and all their collaboraters in this case – actually consumated the transaction and broke the law.
Chas -
“why should Bloomberg be prosecuted for sending out investigators to make illegal weapons sales?? They do that with illicit dreugs[sic] every day, and the same with prostitution…”
Law enforcement does so; and has a legal privilege to do so for a law enforcement purpose (at least in Kansas, and I’m sure the same applies in other states). Bloomberg’s acts, however, are NOT for a law enforcement privilege; rather, they are in furtherance of private actions, i.e. civil suit. Thus no privilege.
BTW – the ATF and several state attorneys general have already stated that their doing so was illegal and their continuing to do so could lead to criminal prosecution.
beat dead horse/
I havent read all of these anti-Tiahrt opinion pieces. If anyone has can you tell me how they dealt with Bloombergs statement that he wants this data for civil lawsuits, if they addressed it at all?
Heck -
They haven’t addressed it at all. They’ve glossed over that little detail. Perhaps the Eagle figures if you ignore that little annoying fact, it’ll go away.
A lie by omission is still a lie. But in the view of the left, it leads to attacking gun owners and businesses, so they figure the end justifies the means.
BTW – did you see the Rev-er-end Jack-son and his buddy Pfleger, who threatened the gun dealer in Chicago a few weeks ago, got arrested for trespass at that dealer’s shop? How fitting.http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/441573,cst-nws-jesse24.article
Arrested for protesting, what a stain on reputation!
How many times has the ATF investigated that shop and did nothing.
Gun used in crimes traced back to that store, doesn’t close it.
Do put more $1 more dollar into the NRA funds, they need it.
You need to help irresponsible gun store owners to soothe your soul, so be it.
In addition to GMC’s statement Chas, Bloomberg went outside his “jurisdiction” into other states to conduct these illegal stings.
That, within of itself, is grounds for Federal charges to be filed against Bloomberg.
I’m still waiting for Rev Jackson to apologize for slander and defamation of the Duke Lacrosse coach and players, for playing the race card, for inciting riots and insurrection, and for defending a lying stripper.
Say Mrage, Jackson was trespassing a private business, just the next victim in his attacks on law-abiding Americans.
We have proof that people have broken gun laws, and we dont prosecute.
Those who have tried to illegally purchase guns should be prosecuted, if the libs were really worried about crime.
However, the libs want MORE laws.
Liberals want to put gun dealers out of business.
Liberals don’t want to put violent criminals out of business.
To support Econ101’s point:
There is practically no enforcement of existing gun laws.
1.4 million denied by the instant background check. Even when the government has the names and addresses of 1.4 million felons, the government chooses not to enforce the law.
Instead, nuts like Bloomberg dream up new schemes and new laws that will catch not one criminal, but it will bankrupt several gun dealers and gun manufacturers – and that is his true goal.
Instead of Chief Williams, Bloomberg and their ilk diving into confidential gun purchase data for their witch hunt, why don’t they track down the 1.4 million law breakers who have already provided their name and address info – and know that they have broken a gun purchase law?
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,Firearm and Explosives’ (ATF) field offices investigated 9,575 National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) denials that were referred by the FBI in 2005.• In 2005 agencies reported 1,400arrests of persons denied a firearm or a permit.• In 2005 U.S. attorney officesaccepted for prosecution 135 NICSdenial cases investigated by ATF.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/bcft05.pdf
It is a felony for someone who is not legally able to buy a firearm (eg. previously convicted felon)to attempt to buy a firearm.
So, if an ex-con goes into a gun store and tries to buy a firearm, fails the background check, there should be BATF and FBI all over this guy to prosecute him or her for committing a felony.
Rarely happens folks.
Still, some just want to pass more gun laws. (and not enforce them either)
“Arrested for protesting, what a stain on reputation!”
Who’s reputation, Mrage? Jackson’s? He hasn’t much reputation left. And the store, as far as I know, has done nothing wrong.
So who’s reputation is at risk here?
My apologies to the regular posters if they actually read reposts before.
Is it a war of repetition? If the Eagle keeps repeating the same Tiahrt lies, will people eventually believe it? (This approach worked for Clinton)
So, while I hate being redundant…the Eagle almost forces the repetitive approach.
I obviously take the 2nd Amendment and rights of Freedom pretty seriously.
No, the Eagle is just hoping someone will make a post that’s good enough for reprint in one of the National newspapers again. :D
LOL!!!
Told my brothers I made the NY Times, course I couldn’t prove it!
Oh well, don’t really want my name in that rag anyway.
We’ve all heard the saying “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…..” Well that’s exactly what the folks that keep clamoring for more gun control laws are doing. My gosh, you should see the “ATF Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide” and the ATF Manual on “State Laws and Published Ordinances – Firearms”. Worse, you should suffer through reading either of them, or for that matter just lifting them!
Damn it….we don’t need more laws, the sheer volume of laws now gets in the way, very similar to our convoluted tax laws. Give some folks an elected office and position of power, a budget and a pen an we’re all in trouble.
Bad people do bad things and need to be punished and restricted so they can’t do more of the same. Law abiding citizens, including firearms manufacturers, distributors, retailers and enthusiasts rarely deal in guns inappropriately. Study after study show that firearms greatly reduce bad outcomes when used by the victims to defend themselves. Notice I’m not even talking about ‘hunting’, that’s not the 2nd. Amendment.
For the law abiding person a firearm’s purpose is not to kill, it is to allow someone to live.
Bloomburg is on a fishing expedition primarily to gain recognition to further his own political ambitions. He has his self promotion agenda and his agenda to destroy the firearms industry because that is much easier than actually tackling crime and punishing it. He is not used to getting his way and is having a literal fit because the Tiahrt Amendment is getting in his way. After all, the established firearms manufacturers and related industries are much easier to find and harass because they aren’t hiding like the crooks. All you have to do is read their licenses. Most people in the firearms industry are obsessive about compliance with the law and take no little pride in conforming with it. A manufacturer, distributer or retailer doesn’t have to have done anything illegal to have Bloomburg take them out with a bankrupting law suit. His legitimate law enforcement bodies have access to those records…they simply have to request them on an individual basis and not simply go fishing for whatever they can find to file a suit and then destroy someone.
All I know is I don’t need anymore firearms, but when I read a lot of what I consider to be liberal tripe, anti-2nd. Amendment stuff as found on this Blog I start looking for another. I’m going to have to get another safe if some of the anti-gun ‘libs’ don’t move away from the keyboard and be quite.I know God loves ya, but I’m struggling.
If new york is against him, then I am for him! Bloomberg is a piece of crap.
GMC,
Jackson is beyond criticism, hate or like him, he’s part of American history.
He protests whatever, accepts the ridicule or fines. But he has as many supporters.
There is something wrong in that gun store.
More than likely many gun stores have things wrong in their record keeping and the ATF is slow to shut those businesses down.
Jackson protests don’t lead to deaths. Guns are used in murders and mayhem.
I’ll wager more people want restrictions on certain types of guns, than wanting Jesse Jackson restricted from protesting. Guns are more despised.
The NRA feels that shame and will accept your donation.
Mark, great post, I agree 100%.
Remember 1993? After Clinton pushed through Brady I, gun sales SOARED!
I know I bought my first hand gun then. Why? Because I wasn’t sure how much longer I’d be able to buy one – legally that is.
IF Clinton Jr, gets elected, we will see, on the day after the election in November 2008, a rush to the gun stores more ferocious even then a bunch of women running to Wal-Mart for the 6 am early bird sale the day after Thanksgiving!
In fact, after reading Mrage and some of these other nuts, I might just go out and buy 1 or 2 guns per month until January 2009! There’s a lot on my wish list, and the more the anti-gun nuts try to take away our Freedom, the harder I push back.
So, Clinton wins in 2008, every cloud has its silver lining. May have to get two or three more gun safes, with a stash here and there buried underground or in a cave somewhere.
Sorta ironic isn’t it? The harder the anti-gunners push for gun control, the MORE guns are SOLD! And I get to celebrate Christmas a little early – every month until Brady II is passed.
“There is something wrong in that gun store.”
Prove it.
And yes, Mark, I’ve got my eye on an AR-15, a defense shotgun, perhaps an AK-47, and a few old military rifles. 8mm Mauser, Enfield, Nagant, perhaps a Garrand, if I can talk the wife into it.
and that’s just the long guns . . .
Buy them now. If Hillary gets elected, the demand (and thus the price) will go up. Perhaps even better, buy them now so they can be sold later at a profit.
Kinda gives you the creeps, huh, Mrage?!?
GMC70,
That looks like my list too!
Except I already have the AR-15: A Bushmaster M4!
I wont disclose how many magazines I have and ammo for it… LOL
Careful, Nathan. gotta keep the secret armory secret . . .just don’t disclose the secret code words, or the handshake.
Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge, say no more.
(Ya listening, Mrage? Call your local ATF!!)
I have a couple of friends who are also gun enthusiasts too.
We laugh about how if we all lived together we would be classified as an militia and probably be staked out by the ATF…
Secret Code Words and Handshkae? I have no idea what you are talking about…. LOL
Of course there are not any code words or secret handshakes. *Wink *Wink
GMC,
Prove that gun store isn’t doing something illegal or immoral.
{The owner of Chuck’s Gun Shop, John Riggio told NBC 5 that he follows strictly the gun laws, when selling any firearm. He also went to say that “any firearms that are stolen or resold on the black market are out of his control”.}
John Riggio is saying guns from his store were robberies by strangers or “allowed”? Maybe this clown is like the gun shop in Tacoma, WA where guns are stolen and he doesn’t know it fast enough.
The northeast sniper with a criminal record had a straw buyer get a rifle from that Tacoma gun store. Then he stole a Bushmaster rifle and used it for the sniper murders and shootings driving across the country. That gun store is still open.
Just like the gun industry to say guns they sell to straw buyers isn’t their problem!
When a straw buyer continually purchases a lot of weapons, what for, they don’t care! They only care about sales.
Jackson didn’t pick it at random. He protested, like anybody has a right to do, got arrested, will pay a fine.
You can’t arm yourself enough to creep me out. I’ve seen walk in closets full of rifles of all kinds, Chinese rifles with bayonets to M-16’s, handguns and hundred boxes of variety of ammo, behind a safe door, in a residence.
Arsenals and why people have them are a curiosity to me.
Pay your NRA dues and be happy, they are protecting people like John Riggio and that gun store in Tacoma, WA.
I’ve known the gun industry since age 14, I don’t respect it outside of hunting weapons.
Mrage -
“Prove that gun store isn’t doing something illegal or immoral.”
I believe, dear, that the burden is on the accuser. Prove away. Good luck.
and no, you can’t join the club. Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more.
GMC,
Watch out, I only got three hours of sleep so far…
clipped..
NEW ORLEANS — When federal agents raided Elliot’s Gun Shop, they hit the jackpot.
Not only was Elliot’s a top source of weapons for crimes used in New Orleans, but the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said that the low-slung metal warehouse in Jefferson, La.,had an even more dubious distinction.
The store was one of the top sources of firearms recovered in crimes in the United States in 2005 and 2006.
In a five-year federal review of transactions at Elliot’s, about 2,300 firearms were traced to crimes, mostly in the New Orleans area, according to U.S. court documents.
At least 125 were linked to murders and 517 were related in some way to drug crimes, according to documents.
The federal raid late last month resulted in the arrests of the owner, two employees and the seizure of numerous firearms.
“Elliot’s was a terror to this community,” New Orleans Police Department Superintendent Warren Riley said.
The superintendent estimated that as many as 65% of all guns used in area crimes during the past few years may have come from Elliot’s.
During the first quarter of 2007, armed robbery in New Orleans was up 135% and murder 182% when compared to the same period in 2006, according to the New Orleans Police Department statistics.
Riley said the crime increases are a reflection of the return of thousands of people who abandoned the city because of Hurricane Katrina. The police superintendent, however, does not dispute the proliferation of guns on the street.
And thousands of those firearms that were linked to local crimes have been tracked back to Elliot’s.
According to federal court records, Elliot’s allegedly bolstered its inventory of firearms and its overall profit margin by stealing the identities of local law enforcement officers who had bought weapons at the store.
For instance, Elliot’s allegedly resubmitted purchase orders in the names of unknowing local officers to qualify for special law enforcement discounts offered by a Rochester, N.Y., wholesaler.
When the weapons were delivered to New Orleans, Elliot’s sold them at higher retail prices to non-law enforcement customers, court documents said.
During the past two years, according to federal court records, Elliot’s allegedly used the scheme to obtain and sell more than 1,000 Glock pistols.
In one example, according to a federal affidavit prepared by ATF special agent Miguel Valle, a New Orleans police officer’s name and credentials were submitted to the wholesaler to obtain discounted weapons without the officer’s knowledge twice in three months.
Hermann Eicke III, Elliot’s owner, did not respond to requests for comment.
—-
2,300 guns from Eliot’s in 5 years were used in crimes. Locally, those gun didn’t travel very far.
I can only assume Chuck’s Gun Shop, largest dealer of guns in the Chicago area has similar statistics. Guns from Chuck’s don’t travel far.
John Riggio may not be illegally using Law Enforcement officers identities to get weapons and sell them at a higher price..yet!
Who knows what he’s doing to misrepresent value of guns the store is selling.
ATF doesn’t work the same way in every state or local community.
New Orleans had Katrina tragedy and resulting crimes afterward. Society was broken there in many areas.
ATF had to do something..radical! Shutting down a gun store!
I’m sure the NRA was pushing more to arm themselves since society was broken there.
Some bad people armed themselves buying retail guns from Eliot’s or getting deals out the back door.
——
WASHINGTON — Guns linked to crimes or considered suspicious from 1996 through 2000 can be traced back to the same 120 gun stores, a gun safety group said Monday, urging the government to set up a watch list of irresponsible or corrupt gun dealers.
Of the 373,006 guns traced from crimes during the four-year period, 54,694 came from the 120 stores, according to data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives.
The 120 stores — located in 22 states — made up less than 1% of the 80,000 individuals and stores licensed to sell guns during that period, said Jim Kessler, the group’s policy director.
“There are a very tiny number of gun dealers who are associated with a huge number of crime guns in America,” said Kessler, who wants a watch list of those merchants.
The top three gun dealers on the list were Chuck’s Guns in Riverdale, Ill., with 2,370 guns sold;
Don’s Guns & Galleries Inc. in Indianapolis, with 2,294
Badger Outdoors Inc. in West Milwaukee, Wis., with 1,906.
The National Rifle Association said any dealer breaking the law should be prosecuted but disagreed with the idea of a watch list.
Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, said government officials already have the tools they need to inspect gun stores at any time.
“This is only a gun control group trying to make themselves relevant in a debate in which they have nothing to say,” said Cox.
“The focus of the investigation should not be taken away from the person who committed the crime.”
——Eliot’s sold 2,300 guns used in crimes around New Orleans.
Chuck’s sold 2,370 guns used in crimes around Chicago or within 25 miles.
That’s why Jesse and protesters are in front of his store.
Those amounts of crime guns sold should give concern and pause to the gun dealers.
——-
An attorney representing the owner of Chuck’s Gun Shop & Range who appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes”
Chuck’s is guilty of using political press!
This a link explaining stings at Chuck’s and entrapment problems.
http://www.gunweek.com/2001/chicago0110.html
Mrage
Guns are banned in the U.K. Check out this story to see how well that is working out.
http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=MK2438914E&news_headline=gun_and_knife_murders_out_of_control
GMC70 and Nathan, maybe you can help me make some decisions here. Code word, ummm Moses? Nooooo, Charleton Heston? Noooooo, “From my cold dead hands”? That’s it!
.45 1911 type Springfield? Colt?
.45 Springfield XD (easier to carry)
.45 Para 14/45 or one of the many versions of this and/or a Kimber or other Specialty Made Piece (pricey though)
.40 Glock 27 (to go with my bigger Glock .40, as a back-up)
.380 Walther PPK or PPKS? (Just for fun and a back-up to the back-up – Always liked the James Bond gun)
Another 9mm in one version or another (not my favorite caliber, but ammo is plentiful)
Another MAK 90 and/or get my old one repaired. 7.62 x 39 (Need a few more BIG CLIPS!)
Would like an AR in .223, but a little out of my price range
Ok, standard 30-06 and/or other decent hunting rifles (Have enough shotguns – or can you ever have enough?)
Not in to wheel guns yet, but have shot several, of course the list would include:
S&W .44 MAGNUM (Dirty Harry!)
S&W .357 (shooting .38’s at targets should be fun and cheap)
Interested in the new large calibers S&W .500, 460, 480 as well as the ole Casul .454, not sure which is best? (I do some hiking, camping, fishing in bear country)
Love the look of the ole cowboy single actions, but I have no experience with these – other than when I was 12 I shot my uncle’s guns. (Years before that, Dad taught all of his boys to shoot a .22 rifle when we were age 6 or 7 – just big enough to hold the thing! Used to be an American tradition.)
Need to get at least one gun a month for the next 18 months or so before Clinton is elected.
If she doesn’t win and the 2nd Amendment is still supported, I can always sell or trade-in these guns later. Or keep for a few years as collector items to pass down to the kids.
Mrage -
I guess I’ll have to call Chuck’s and buy that AR-15. Perhaps I can get a volume discount!!
Wink wink, nudge nudge. Say no more.
Max -
All of the above. And you can never go wrong with a 1911; just buy a good one. Kimber, Colt, Para, Springfield, etc.
I don’t like the XDs; they’re apparantly good guns, just a personal preference. I don’t like Glocks, either. Again, just personal preference. The both pass the test that matters, though: they go bang, reliably, over and over.
Have fun. With any luck, if Hillary is elected, there may be a silver lining yet – those firearms may be profitable!!
Max -
All of the above. And you can never go wrong with a 1911; just buy a good one. Kimber, Colt, Para, Springfield, etc.
I don’t like the XDs; they’re apparantly good guns, just a personal preference. I don’t like Glocks, either. Again, just personal preference. They both pass the test that matters, though: they go bang, reliably, over and over.
Have fun. With any luck, if Hillary is elected, there may be a silver lining yet – those firearms may be profitable!!
Double post. Part of the secret code. Wink Wink.
I guess the “Hillary taking your guns away” is the right-wing’s idea of a really hilarious joke.
1. Did Bill take your guns away? He banned military type assault weapons. I’m sure you gun paranoids see that AS ONLY THE FIRST STEP!!!
(And puleeze! spare all of us sentient readers the minutia of what distinguishes an assault weapon from an ordinary semi-auto rifle–we have lives that involve other things than memorizing the specifications of a well-crafted piece of steel.)
2. You should really have a Freudian psychiatrist take a look at why you’re so terrified of a WOMAN in power taking away YOUR GUN.
It’s not a phallus, you know. Gun fondling has nothing to do with manliness.
Some of us gun-owners — I am one — understand that.
Others seem to be . . . uh . . . over-compensating, shall we say?
Max,
If you are planning on buying one gun a month why not get one gun every two or three months and get an AR-15!
A Pistol is nice, but when you want to stop those “pesky problems” before they are close enough to get you, I would rather have an AR-15.
You can reach out and touch someone with that!
I admit the Glocks are not pretty, but they are hard to beat for capacity (13 rounds +1 in mine)and lightweight. In the summer it is a little more challenging to carry concealed, and the lighter the better.
Always wanted a .45. Can’t beat the looks of the classic 1911, though it’s one heavy sob. That’s why I like the Springfield XD (especially the 10 rd carry mag and 13 rd higher capacity mag), similar to the Glock 45, but a little smaller and angled more comfortably for my hand.
The new Glock .21 SF (small frame) in .45 is very similar to the Springfield – sharp one I think! (Almost got one last month, when I went back the next day it was gone!)
Gosh Mrage, hope you aren’t too offended. Get out to the range a couple of times and you’ll be converted too. Nothing wrong with Freedom is there? I love the smell of gunpowder in the morning!
Capn -
You seem to be concerned with phallus/phallic symbols. Just what does that say about you?
Inquiring minds really don’t give d***, of course. It’s just a good time to tweek you a bit!
CapnAmerica,
You might be a gun owner, but that obviously doesn’t make you a member of the group of real gun owners.
On one hand you want to have a discussion about weapons here, but then you admit to not knowing what you are talking about.
Clinton banned several assualt rifles and then banned features on the rest.
Even you add the word “military” in front of “assualt rifle” to further show your bias.
We are not scared or overreacting.
Prominent members of the Democratic Party have all stated their intentions about guns.
Good idea Nathan. 2 or 3 handguns does equal one AR.
Struggling with how to carry a handgun on the hip, a rifle and a shotgun too. Ah, the problems of life.
And yes Capn, Clinton did take away many guns or tried to. He drove up the price by increasing demand so much. Made it much more difficult to get normal capacity clips, thus ending future demand for large frame handguns for years. Did nothing except diminish the capability for law-abiding people to defend themselves.
And of course you don’t want to discuss assault weapon bans – because you can’t win your argument of definition.
And Capn, only when you have a physical deficiency causing an inferiority complex, combined with a warped mind would you equate guns with sex. How perverted are you? Never mind, I don’t want to know the answer.
Max,
Get a Tactical Vest, Drop Holster, and 3-Point Tactical sling!
I have a Tac Vest with place for my pistol, 4 spare pistol mags, 12 M-16 style mags, and radio pouch.
There is always a way to carry more… LOL
I just need to lose weight so I have room to carry more stuff!
“Clinton banned several assualt rifles and then banned features on the rest.”
The Republican Congress passed the laws – Clinton signed them. That is how a republic works. If you want to assign blame, then you have to also point at the Congress.
And learn to use spell check, for Christ sake – you should know how to spell assault rifle before you use on.
WS
don’t nit pick about the spelling — it loses focus on your message. It would be nice if spell check were easily available within the blog
It is. I use Firefox 2.0 which has spell check for blog posts.
“And learn to use spell check, for Christ sake – you should know how to spell assault rifle before you use ((((on.)))”
Posted by: WSClark | June 26, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Indeed Ken…
People in glass houses and all that. :)
At least it was spelled correctly, dumbass.
What message?
“And learn to use spell check, for Christ sake – you should know how to spell assault rifle before you use on.”
Oh, the spelling message.
Get some help Clark.
Blow it out of your fleetwood, Max. I have been waiting now for two weeks for you to “knock my ass down a few pegs.”
When is that going to happen, tough guy?
Walk on bye…..
It’s “walk on by” dumbass.
Ok, Walk on By Dumbass!
Would love to stay and argue, but I’m going shopping at lunch – at the gun store. They have a special on Varmint guns!
WS
You seem to continually get in these kind of irrelevant, stupid, pointless, prove your manhood contests. Why is that?
And Max, don’t jump in it; it gains nothing. As you put it, walk on by – or bye, of you like.
If you must, you two, please move your pissing contest somewhere else. Perhaps we could devote an entire thread to pointless personal sparring . . . .
“You seem to continually get in these kind of irrelevant, stupid, pointless, prove your manhood contests.”
Wrong, GMC, I don’t go looking for such contests, but I am sure as Hell not going to back down.
Max told me that “he was going to knock my ass down a few pegs” and I have been waiting ever since.
He threw down – not me – so why should I back down?
I noticed, GMC, that you had no problem with Max’ offer, but you suggest that I have a problem.
Interesting.
I may be a liberal GMC, but I won’t back down to anyone.
I know GMC70, I was bad. It’s just too easy with Clark. Another softball ya know….
We had a nice discussion going about firearms before we were so rudely interrupted. Would be nice to continue some time.
Off to lunch.
“We had a nice discussion going about firearms before we were so rudely interrupted”
So you don’t want to discuss anything unless everyone agrees with you? Interesting.
I noticed that none of you gun owners commented on my statements that I wish all of you gun owners chould have free access to any weapon that you want. I really could care less about guns and gun owners. I have owned several guns in the past, hand guns and rifles, and most likely will in the future.
As far as I am concerned, have at it.
I noticed also, that no one challenged my statement regarding the Republican Congress and Clinton.
That doesn’t fit into the nice, neat gun owner concept that any restriction are all Clinton’s fault, despite the fact that he merely signed the Republican passed bill into law.
If all of the gun owners want to have a private conversation about all the guns and equipment they want to buy, I would suggest several other blogs. This, however, it an open blog, and you cannot uninvite those that offend you. Our opinion count, just as yours do.
The problem’s not your participation, WS, but the pissing contest that seems to inevitably ensue. I’d advise you take the chip off your shoulder. Life’s just to short to look for opportunities to take offense.
Of course, if your manhood’s that fragile, where you need to prove it at every slight, well . . . that speaks to deeper issues, doesn’t it.
As to what Hillary will do, well, we’ll see, won’t we, should she get elected. I intend to take it as excuse to get that AR-15, if nothing else. If that sort of thing pisses her and Chuckie Schumer off, so much the better!
Max
I highly recommend one of the XD45’s. I love mine. Capacity of a Glock 21 with much better ergonomics. And someone, can’t remember who, is making a plus3 grip extension for it!!
WS Clark,
If the Republicans didn’t take control of Congress untill January of 1995 and the Federal Assualt Weapons ban was passed in September of 1994 how then do you claim it was passed under Republican control?
And this song goes out to WSClark from Radio Station E.L.I.B.
From George Thoroughgood -
“I drink alone.”
Why would we ever think that the Democrats are anti-gun?
Just as they retook Congress this is what they do:
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1022
To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.
Sponsors:
Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] – 4/16/2007 Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] – 3/7/2007Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] – 3/13/2007 Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] – 5/8/2007Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] – 3/9/2007 Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] – 3/9/2007Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] – 3/7/2007 Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] – 3/13/2007Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] – 3/13/2007 Rep Emanuel, Rahm [IL-5] – 4/26/2007Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] – 3/9/2007 Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] – 4/16/2007Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] – 3/7/2007 Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] – 3/7/2007Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] – 3/7/2007 Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] – 3/9/2007Rep Harman, Jane [CA-36] – 4/19/2007 Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] – 3/13/2007Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] – 4/19/2007 Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] – 3/7/2007Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] – 3/22/2007 Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] – 5/3/2007Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] – 3/15/2007 Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] – 3/15/2007Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] – 3/7/2007 Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7] – 3/13/2007Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] – 3/13/2007 Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] – 3/7/2007Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] – 3/9/2007 Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] – 3/7/2007Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] – 5/8/2007 Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] – 5/8/2007Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] – 5/3/2007 Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8] – 3/13/2007Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] – 3/22/2007 Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] – 6/6/2007Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] – 3/7/2007 Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] – 3/7/2007Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] – 3/15/2007 Rep Sires, Albio [NJ-13] – 6/6/2007Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] – 3/13/2007 Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] – 3/15/2007Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] – 3/7/2007 Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] – 3/22/2007Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] – 4/26/2007 Rep Watt, Melvin L. [NC-12] – 5/8/2007Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] – 4/16/2007 Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] – 3/9/2007Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] – 4/26/2007
“Of course, if your manhood’s that fragile”
GMC, I would have expected better from you, but so be it.
I have no problems with my manhood in any way shape or form. I was merely responding to Max’ unprovoked intention to “knock my ass down a few pegs.”
Would you expect me to back down from that statement? Would you expect anyone to back down from that statement?
The threat was totally unprovoked and I was not even addressing him when he made it.
And I could not help but notice that you did not call him to task for making the statement in the first place.
Interesting.
That statement as I recall WSClark was said several days ago if not more than a week ago.
Grow up, get over it.
Nathan
And Chuck Schumer has been trying to amend the RICO statute so that he can use it to go after gun owners, dealers, shooting clubs, etc. as if they are organized criminals.
Too typical “Progressive”.
Yes, Nathan, it was past in 1994 and the Republican controlled Congress voted to repeal the ban in 1996 – they failed.
If the Republicans were so Hell-bent on repealing the law, they could have done so several times in the Nineties and then again in 2001.
Instead, they chose to merely allow it to expire. The NRA is just playing you. If they were serious about assault weapons being available, the Republicans would have repealed the law in January 2001.
As I have stated many times before – you gun owners can have any type of weapon you want from my perspective. I really don’t care.
As I see it, it is analogous to guys who buy 180 HP motorcycles from their local Honda, Suzuki, Yamaha or Kawasaki dealer. It has no real use in the real world, but spend your money and make yourself feel good. Be my guest – have at it.
Just stay off my bumper.
“That statement as I recall WSClark was said several days ago if not more than a week ago.”
I already said that it was two weeks ago, Republank, learn to read.
You delight in posting comments that people have made MONTHS ago – you posted one of my from APRIL recently, so what is your point, dumbass?
WS
I read worse from that, often (but not always) from the left, on a regular basis.
I’m man enough to ignore it. If it comes down to it, I’ll ignore the writer. What I WILL NOT do is engage in a pissing contest.
Join me in at least that.
Frankly, you’ve surprised me since coming back from WV. You seemed to have take a step back from the “hate and vilify any who disagrees with me” attitude that typified the blog over there. Don’t regress now.
I’ve scolded Max, and others on the right as well, from time to time, if that’s relevant. I don’t think it is, of course; “he did it first” died as an acceptable excuse for unacceptable behavior in the second grade.
And if this conversation is about to become such a pissing contest, I’ll end it right now.
Which statement was that WSClark? Perhaps it bears repeating? :)
I have stated my respect for you and your opinions in the past, GMC, (especially on this subject) but to further clarify Max’ statement, he said that he was going “to yada, yada,” IN YOUR NAME.
You specifically.
Interesting.
I merely expressed my opinion. I will continue to do so. As I have stated many times before, I never draw first blood.
End of story.
The gun issue is one that I have an interest in – not from the perspective of a gun owner, but from the perspective of a liberal that would just as soon give on this issue so that more pressing concerns can be addressed.
That was my point in commenting on this thread in the first place.
Second amendment rights are not important WSClark?
Or towards the slant from your perspective, using tactics of dishonest political brokering by Bloomberg is not important enough to challenge?
I think millions of Americans may have different opinions on establishing importance to this matter.
“Second amendment rights are not important WSClark?”
And when and where did I say that Second Amendment rights were not important?
I said that I don’t care – have all the big and powerful guns you want.
As for Bloomberg – until last week, we was one of yours – have at it – he is not a Democrat.
He – We?????????????
Say Heckler, on the Springfield XD45, aren’t the 13 round mags made by Springfield?
I’m debating between the XD45 and the new Glock 21 SF (small frame). Very close to each other, have you seen it?
WS Clark,
First you claim that it was the Republican controlled congress which passed the Assault Weapons Ban.
You were wrong.
Now you are saying that the Republicans could have repealed it in 2001.
It is like you just don’t give up.
You simple can’t admit you were wrong and move on.
You have to throw even more claims which are wrong.
The NRA is not playing me. The NRA is the voice of millions of gun owners in this country and they do a wonderful job.
You say Republicans could have repealed the ban in the 90’s. How?
Do you think Clinton would have signed that? Honestly?
Would they have been able to beat the veto?
Oc course not.
So why do you say they could have repealed the ban in the 90’s?
“I think millions of Americans may have different opinions on establishing importance to this matter.”
Certainly you weren’t suggesting that gun laws are the Number One priority for Americans, were you Republank?
I am not positive, but I think that more Americans are concerned about the War on Iraq, terrorism, deficit spending, health care, Social Security, immigration, borders, education, etc.
Millions of Americans may be concerned about gun laws, but there are 300 million of us in total.
There are more pressing issues than gun laws.
Max
I haven’t seen the new small frame Glock 21. I’d be interested in fondling one.
I can’t say if Springfield makes their own mags. They seem to be good ones though. I bought 2 spares at a gun show and they were in Springfield packaging.
“Now you are saying that the Republicans could have repealed it in 2001.” They had all three branches, why DIDN’T they repeal the law?
“Would they have been able to beat the veto?” Why not? They had a clear majority and claimed that gun control Democrats cost the Dems the House in Senate in 1994.
“You were wrong.” Yes, I was, I should have stated that the Republicans controlled the Congress after 1995 and could have repealed the law – they brought it up for a vote – my memory of the time was faulty. I remembered the repeal vote incorrectly.
If the Republicans are the answer to your question, what about this……
“Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes. In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semi-automatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose.”
I have already stated repeatedly that I could care less about how big your gun is – what do you want me to do – buy the god damned things for you?
Max
I’ve only had one problem with the XD45. The first day I shot it I took a mixed bag of ammo, a little of every type of .45ACP I had, including 4 different types of hollow points.
The only thing it choked on were some cheap gun show reloads I’d had around for about 10 years. The FMJ’s were loaded a hair long and the nose of the bullet dragged on the front of the mag and they wouldnt feed up. They’ve done everything they can to make the grip of this gun as small as possible so beware if you shoot reloads.
Saw the first Glock 21 SF that came in to the local gun shop. By measurement, it’s not that much different then the regular 21. But by FEEL, wow! I went back the next day to get it, and it was gone! It does take a different Glock magazine due to ambidextrious mag releases. The 21 SF Mags fit in both the regular 21 and 21 SF, but not vice versa.
I do like to get to the range and try out different firearms – all tend to want to share and show-off at the range ya know. So I always like to try something before buying it, if possible. Heck, could always resell it.
Fair enough, WS.
I don’t know of the statement you cite; if Max is stating what I will or won’t do, or said or didn’t say, or would say, whatever; well, let’s just say that no one speaks for me here except me. I’m a conservative, and proudly so, but I don’t hesitate to part company with the “party line” on some issues (as you know). There are other issues, frankly most issues, I simply won’t write on; either I have no strong opinions or little to add that hasn’t been said, or I don’t know enough about the subject to say anything intelligent (probably a lot of that!!), or, often, I just don’t have the time, and instead just follow a thread or two.
There are posters on both sides I respect (Max is generally one of those, BTW, as are you), and there are those on both sides just looking to stir up trouble. There are the predictible, and those who will surprise me from time to time (you’re one of those, too).
And there are those, on both sides, that neither want to claim. Stupid knows no party.
I just find the endless personal tit-for-tat incredibly annoying and incredibly non-productive. And yes, sometimes I have to bit my tongue (or fingers) to keep from zipping off some smart-ass comment I’ll regret. Sometimes that doesn’t work, either, and I’ll zip off something I shouldn’t write.
Usually, I try to simply ignore the rabble and stick to issues.
And I think this thread’s about done.
How ’bout Cheney’s lunatic claim that he’s not in the executive branch? (oh – there’s a thread on that!!!)
Have a good day, WS.
Sure don’t recall saying anything in GMC’s name. Wouldn’t pretend to be able to stand in his shoes or assume I could direct him in any way. Actually I find GMC’s posts to be some of the most enjoyable and educational posts on this blog, and I have said that in the past. And I almost always share his view as well.
Whatever, I really have no recall as to what you are talking about anyway Clark, and don’t care to go back through the thousands of posts to try to find what you are referring to.
What would the point be?
“…………… On the chance that perhaps, someone (me maybe?) might call you out to task, though GMC70 has done the same, maybe NOW is the time for the posters to arise and knock your ass down a few pegs……..”
Posted by: Max | June 08, 2007 at 08:12 PM
And there are those that accuse ME of being a doper and a drunk.
So? What’s the point Clark? This post been eating on you for 3 weeks now? Get over it. Heck, I can barely remember yesterday!
Just waiting for you to knock me down a few pegs, Max. It doesn’t eat on me. Like I said, I am fifty five years old an undefeated.
And I have a long memory.
But you should really try to remember the challenges that you post. The Internet is forever.
It took me all of twenty seconds to find your post.
Neither one of us is a choir boy Clark. We could go back and look at quite a few posts that I’m sure neither one of us would brag about.
Unbeaten? We could debate that till hell freezes over too, and we could be in a pissing match for a long time if you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time to waste on that.
If your memory is so good, you’ll also remember that once I even complimented you.
And if you care to debate on something – like you said in some other post somewhere, about those issues that are more important to you than the 2nd Amendment, I’m all ears.
A big issue to me, for example, is the pending immigration bill. There will now be a vote on this next week. Far more important than Tiahrt, though I wonder if the WE will put that up as a post topic.
In any case, I must tend to more important matters now – the bbq is waiting!
As I said, Max, you threw down the challenge, I merely responded.
All of New York vs. Tiahrt. Yeah sure. When the press pushes liberal ideology, Bloomberg+cohorts = all of New York.
I know this thread is about over, and it well should be, but I stumbled across this and thought it was appropriate. Here, folks, is the result of gun bans. Not only has crime exploded in Britain, but they cook the books to hide the truth:
“A former Home Office research expert said that across all types of crime, three million offences a year are excluded from the British Crime Survey (BCS).
The poll caps the number of times a victim can be targeted by an offender at five incidents a year.
If anyone interviewed for the survey says they have been targeted more than five times a year, the sixth incident and beyond are not included in the BCS.”
And -
“Violent crime is 82 per cent higher at 4.4 million offences compared with 2.4 million in the BCS, the survey claims, including a 156 per cent rise in ” acquaintance violence” from 817,000 incidents to 2.1 million.
Domestic violence is 140 per cent higher, up from 357,000 incidents a year to 857,000, the authors said, while there are nearly three million common assaults a year rather than the 1.5 million estimated by the BCS, a rise of 98 per cent.
Burglary is 20 per cent higher than currently estimated, at 877,000 a year, and vandalism is 24 per cent higher, the report calculated.
Robbery is 7 per cent up on the official estimates, or an extra 22,000 crimes bringing the yearly total to 333,000.
“If the people who say they suffered 10 incidents really did, it is capping the series at five that distorts the rate,” the authors said.
“It is truly bizarre that the victimisation survey, based as it is on the assumption that people will by and large tell the truth about what happened to them, … suddenly withdraws its trust in their honesty when what they are told does not chime with their own experience.”
And note the result of this:
“The authors said: “The unwillingness to believe the facts of chronic victimisation means that crime control, police training and criminal justice action are now substantially misdirected.”
In particular, the system means that the most vulnerable people in society may not be getting the police protection they require from repeat offenders, the report said.”
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2710596.ece
This in a society who’s violent crime rate is amoung the highest in the world; higher than the U.S. This is what happens when you put your complete trust in the State.Is this what we want?
GMC
The Brits do anything they can to “hide” their ever rising crime rate. In one world survey of crime rates they reported “manslaughter” seperately from “murder”. Got to keep those tourism dollars comin in ya know.
June 26 8:31am
Good article GMC. Taking away guns is not about solving crime, it’s about taking power and control from the people and giving more of it to the government.
All I know for sure is:
1) I can’t trust the Government to tell the truth and publish accurate statistics.2) Given the quality of the Free Press today, I’m not sure the public ever hears the full and complete truth about any topic.3) The Government does NOT enforce the law, and at the same time tries to stop the public from defending themselves. 4) Why? Because the Government claims to be able to solve every problem and meet every need of the people – we don’t need to do anything (even think) for ourselves.5) Why do they claim to be able to meet our every need and protect us? Those in Government need to control the people to ensure they maintain their power. By making people dependent on Government – they maintain their power and control.6) The Government couldn’t care less about the people, they are only looking out for themselves.
I see two basic types of people in this world:
1) Those who are self-reliant, want to work hard, don’t want or need the government to go beyond the basic scope of government which is:
a) Provide a common defense of the country.b) Enforce the law and keep the peace internally – police protection.c) Fire protection and public safety.d) Public highways and transportation to further commerce.e) Provide a venue for education, which can be include school vouchers for parents to choose the best public or private school in their area.f) Balance the needs of protecting the environment and the needs for agriculture and energy.g) I can take care of myself and want the government to stay out of my business – keep me free!
2) Those who think that on the 1st day they are born into this world and the world owes them something, and that government is there to take care of them from cradle to grave. Thus the role of government is to:
a) through f) aboveg) Through progressive taxes and welfare, make sure the hard-working prosperous Americans are penalized for working, and forced to give their money to those who choose not to work hard and be prosperous – SOCIALISM.h) Provide FREE Everything like: Healthcare, Education, Transportation, Retirement, Vacations (FMLA), Free or subsidized housing (HUD), free property and flood insurance (New Orleans), etc…i) Make the top 1% pay 35.73% of the taxes. Make the top 5% pay 56.23% of the taxes. Make the top 10% pay 67.57% of the taxes. Make the top 25% pay 84.42% of the taxes. May the top 50% pay 96.60% of the taxes.http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in07tr.xls(Not sure how Clinton and Obama will raise the taxes of the “rich” any higher than they already are! That’s their plan to pay for even more SOCIALIST programs like National Health care!)j) I can’t take care of myself, but somebody else can! The Government can! The hard-working people can!And I’m ok with giving up all rights and freedoms to the goverenment – as long as they take care of me!
Mayor Michael bloomberg doesn’t get his way this time.The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Passed the Shelby Amendment, reinstating language commonly known as the Tiahrt Amendment. Bloomberg’s and Mikulski’s attempt to strip it was Rejected!New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently asked anti-gun and anti-law enforcement Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to strip the language from the Senate bill. By complying with Bloomberg’s request, Sen. Mikulski defied the appeals of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) representing over 300,000 rank and file law enforcement men and women across the country, Southern States Police Benevolent Association, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) that this information remain exclusively in the law enforcement realm.This attempt on Mayor Bloomberg’s part was simply a political ploy to advance his own political aspirations and anti-gun agenda using civil courts to harass manufacturers, distributors and retailers, and to undermine the objective of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.. Looks like he came up short for now. GOOD!!!
Mayor Michael bloomberg doesn’t get his way this time.The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Passed the Shelby Amendment, reinstating language commonly known as the Tiahrt Amendment. Bloomberg’s and Mikulski’s attempt to strip it was Rejected!New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently asked anti-gun and anti-law enforcement Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to strip the language from the Senate bill. By complying with Bloomberg’s request, Sen. Mikulski defied the appeals of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) representing over 300,000 rank and file law enforcement men and women across the country, Southern States Police Benevolent Association, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) that this information remain exclusively in the law enforcement realm.This attempt on Mayor Bloomberg’s part was simply a political ploy to advance his own political aspirations and anti-gun agenda using civil courts to harass manufacturers, distributors and retailers, and to undermine the objective of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.. Looks like he came up short for now. GOOD!!!
Mayor Michael bloomberg doesn’t get his way this time.The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Passed the Shelby Amendment, reinstating language commonly known as the Tiahrt Amendment. Bloomberg’s and Mikulski’s attempt to strip it was Rejected!New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently asked anti-gun and anti-law enforcement Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) to strip the language from the Senate bill. By complying with Bloomberg’s request, Sen. Mikulski defied the appeals of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) representing over 300,000 rank and file law enforcement men and women across the country, Southern States Police Benevolent Association, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) that this information remain exclusively in the law enforcement realm.This attempt on Mayor Bloomberg’s part was simply a political ploy to advance his own political aspirations and anti-gun agenda using civil courts to harass manufacturers, distributors and retailers, and to undermine the objective of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.. Looks like he came up short for now. GOOD!!!
Whoa………I only clicked the ‘Post’ button once. What happened with the repeat postings? Sorry.