Eric Swalwell, US House Representative from the Bay Area (where everyone has the right to poop on the street, because if you got to go, you got to go) writes an OpEd for USA Today:
The OpEd begins with a story from when he was a Prosecutor:
"Gary Jackson never stood a chance.
Gary was 28 and working as a security guard at a taco truck in Oakland, Calif., in 2009 when he saw Dreshawn Lee carrying a sawed-off shotgun and reported it to police. Three months later, Lee took his revenge by shooting and killing Jackson with an AK-47-style semiautomatic assault rifle."
No mention, of course, is made as to why Lee wasn't arrested for having an illegal weapon and prosecuted by his office. Law enforcement obviously investigated - how else would he know to take revenge? But if you don't turn in your assault weapon under his plan, YOU will be prosecuted.
Perhaps the scariest yet funniest comment : "The right to live is supreme over any other." Scary because he is a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Funny because you can guess what this guy's position is on abortion (note that StoneHendge is rather neutral on that issue).
He's willing to offer $200 on trade ins. That would cover the cost of the JP high pressure bolt in my 6.5 CM! Okay - he goes up $1k. I'd be willing to sell my Sub2k to the government for $1k. And if you don't turn it in, you will be prosecuted. Unlike Mr. Lee, who had committed a federal felony by illegally possessing an NFA weapon (I think it's safe to assume that he didn't have a stamp).
Give him credit for saying what he really wants and thinks about the Constitution. And what the people who elected him also think.
StoneHendge Wrote:Eric Swalwell, US House Representative from the Bay Area (where everyone has the right to poop on the street, because if you got to go, you got to go) writes an OpEd for USA Today:
The OpEd begins with a story from when he was a Prosecutor:
"Gary Jackson never stood a chance.
Gary was 28 and working as a security guard at a taco truck in Oakland, Calif., in 2009 when he saw Dreshawn Lee carrying a sawed-off shotgun and reported it to police. Three months later, Lee took his revenge by shooting and killing Jackson with an AK-47-style semiautomatic assault rifle."
No mention, of course, is made as to why Lee wasn't arrested for having an illegal weapon and prosecuted by his office.
StoneHendge Wrote:Perhaps the scariest yet funniest comment : "The right to live is supreme over any other." Scary because he is a member of the House Judiciary Committee.
05-04-2018, 12:15 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2018, 12:17 PM by montana.)
StoneHendge Wrote:Eric Swalwell, US House Representative from the Bay Area (where everyone has the right to poop on the street, because if you got to go, you got to go) writes an OpEd for USA Today:
The OpEd begins with a story from when he was a Prosecutor:
"Gary Jackson never stood a chance.
Gary was 28 and working as a security guard at a taco truck in Oakland, Calif., in 2009 when he saw Dreshawn Lee carrying a sawed-off shotgun and reported it to police. Three months later, Lee took his revenge by shooting and killing Jackson with an AK-47-style semiautomatic assault rifle."
No mention, of course, is made as to why Lee wasn't arrested for having an illegal weapon and prosecuted by his office. Law enforcement obviously investigated - how else would he know to take revenge? But if you don't turn in your assault weapon under his plan, YOU will be prosecuted.
Perhaps the scariest yet funniest comment : "The right to live is supreme over any other." Scary because he is a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Funny because you can guess what this guy's position is on abortion (note that StoneHendge is rather neutral on that issue).
He's willing to offer $200 on trade ins. That would cover the cost of the JP high pressure bolt in my 6.5 CM! Okay - he goes up $1k. I'd be willing to sell my Sub2k to the government for $1k. And if you don't turn it in, you will be prosecuted. Unlike Mr. Lee, who had committed a federal felony by illegally possessing an NFA weapon (I think it's safe to assume that he didn't have a stamp).
Give him credit for saying what he really wants and thinks about the Constitution. And what the people who elected him also think.
This says it all, as I quote: Australia got it right. This coming from a state that is $1.3 trillion in dept as of June 30, 2015. http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html Whole sections of cities that look like the worst slums in Liberia.https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/03/...r-cleanup/https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/02/20...y-millions
The government has failed, "so like all tyrants" they have to get a scapegoat boogeyman to distract from the real hazard of their failed leadership. Like all failed governments, the last thing they want is for the people to be armed, especially with modern firearms.
montana Wrote:This says it all, as I quote: Australia got it right.
Well, Australia reportedly has not had any mass shootings with rifles like the AR-15 since their ban...
montana Wrote:This coming from a state that is $1.3 trillion in dept as of June 30, 2015.
The government has failed, "so like all tyrants" they have to get a scapegoat boogeyman to distract from the real hazard of their failed leadership. Like all failed governments, the last thing they want is for the people to be armed, especially with modern firearms.
Oh, please. Not that silliness again.
In case you hadn't noticed, there is a very real concern about such shootings throughout the country, not just among some California politicians.
To dismiss the issue as a "scapegoat boogeyman created by tyrants" won't help anyone deal effectively with the reality.
stanc Wrote:Well, Australia reportedly has not had any mass shootings with rifles like the AR-15 since their ban...
Oh, please. Not that silliness again.
In case you hadn't noticed, there is a very real concern about such shootings throughout the country, not just among some California politicians.
To dismiss the issue as a "scapegoat boogeyman created by tyrants" won't help anyone deal effectively with the reality.
That seems to be the problem, we all have a different opinion of what reality is. I'm glad to see you are be feeling better Stan, you haven't missed a beat.
stanc Wrote:To dismiss the issue as a "scapegoat boogeyman created by tyrants" won't help anyone deal effectively with the reality.
That is actually what helps us deal with the reality. The 2A is just a battle. An important one, but still just a battle. The true war is against the tyrants and reclaiming a government by the people for the people. I know we're not supposed to get political here, but MAGA!
Yeah, good news! I definitely appreciate that Stanc and montana and those others that do, can keep it civil, elevated and intelligent discussion. The educated and objectively argued points are worth the read whilst so many other posts just aren't.
stanc Wrote:Well, Australia reportedly has not had any mass shootings with rifles like the AR-15 since their ban...
Oh, please. Not that silliness again.
In case you hadn't noticed, there is a very real concern about such shootings throughout the country, not just among some California politicians.
To dismiss the issue as a "scapegoat boogeyman created by tyrants" won't help anyone deal effectively with the reality.
The concern is fueled by the media and politicians. Keep people focused on the that one tree, and they will not see the forest being clear cut around them.
Some violent person kills multiple people with a rifle, it's a tragedy, but it's insignificant to the number of other deaths that could be prevented.
Prescription drug deaths - should we ban those? Well that would be silly, since they (Rx drugs) save more than they kill.
Drinking and driving - Prohibition again? We saw how that worked. Lot of people drink alcohol, an insignificant number drive when they shouldn't, and has fallen off the radar since the '90s.
Texting and driving/distracted driving, yet we still have not even considered banning cell phones or required them to shutdown when moving faster than 5mph. We just make gadgets to make it easier to pay attention to the phone hands free.
Influenza.....30k +/- in the US. Guns...13k +/-. Mmmmmkay. The billionaires and politicians would rather get guns away from the peasants than find something that keeps killing off a lot of the young and old every year.
Bad Doctors and Hospital mistakes...Rich people that spent a lot of time and money send a disturbing amount to the basement.
OMFG!!!! Gotta get rid of the guns.
Stanc - You are great at dismissing everyone else, and (I'm sure) examples that I have listed above, effectively supporting these gun control measures. Do you not have a position to oppose these actions by the left to impose more restrictions on firearm ownership?
Are you actually in favor of the continued restrictions that we (the average paranoid gun nut) are fairly confident will lead up to the US falling in line with the rest of the world in removing firearms from the hands and homes of the average population?
I am fairly sure this has been asked of you before, and i have no desire to go searching the several hundred 2A threads looking for it, so please, I am asking it again.
stanc Wrote:In case you hadn't noticed, there is a very real concern about such shootings throughout the country, not just among some California politicians.
The concern is fueled by the media and politicians.
Certainly. If people could be kept from learning about mass shootings, I'm sure there would be almost no concern. But, they do know, and they are concerned.
Sticks Wrote:Some violent person kills multiple people with a rifle, it's a tragedy, but it's insignificant to the number of other deaths that could be prevented.
Prescription drug deaths - should we ban those? Well that would be silly, since they (Rx drugs) save more than they kill.
Drinking and driving - Prohibition again? We saw how that worked. Lot of people drink alcohol, an insignificant number drive when they shouldn't, and has fallen off the radar since the '90s.
Texting and driving/distracted driving, yet we still have not even considered banning cell phones or required them to shutdown when moving faster than 5mph. We just make gadgets to make it easier to pay attention to the phone hands free.
Influenza.....30k +/- in the US. Guns...13k +/-. Mmmmmkay. The billionaires and politicians would rather get guns away from the peasants than find something that keeps killing off a lot of the young and old every year.
Bad Doctors and Hospital mistakes...Rich people that spent a lot of time and money send a disturbing amount to the basement.
There is a phrase: One of these is not like the others.
Mass shootings are intentional, premeditated murder.
The other items you list are unintentional, accidental.
Sticks Wrote:Stanc - You are great at dismissing everyone else, and (I'm sure) examples that I have listed above, effectively supporting these gun control measures. Do you not have a position to oppose these actions by the left to impose more restrictions on firearm ownership?
Not sure what you mean by "a position to oppose these actions." If you're asking what I think should be done by pro-gun folks, I have nothing new or unique to suggest beyond what LR55 and others have already mentioned: Vote, write, run for office, etc.
Sticks Wrote:Are you actually in favor of the continued restrictions that we (the average paranoid gun nut) are fairly confident will lead up to the US falling in line with the rest of the world in removing firearms from the hands and homes of the average population?
LOL. No. I like guns, and military small arms in particular. I am now, and always have been, opposed to all gun control laws.
I see a buisness oppertunity here. The buy back (and sooner or later there will be one) is $1000 per AR. The price of a complete or 80% lower is around $70-$100. So, if every other payday, a guy spends 200 bucks on lowers and just puts them in a box in the back of his closet...He will make more money than any other investmet I know of. Heck, a guy who really beleaves that there will be a AR ban, could easily make a million dolllars from a buyback.. . And probably be young enough to enjoy the money when it does happan.
98Z Wrote:Right. The madmen that were hellbent on doing what they do, just found other ways. And still did it.
You gonna ban the Noveske Assault Hammer next? Hope it cuts down on killings with hammers?
Almost impossible to ban guns in America without starting a massive civil war. And the first thing that would happen, anyway, would be a massive, massive black market in firearms.
Banning guns is mostly symbolism. You cannot fix cultural problems via politics. That is really the function of the faith community.
And the left loves to have someone to demonize. Look at most of the communists dictators. Nothing works, blame everything on the left or the Jews. Always in campaign mode like both Obama and Castro did (called being a revolutionary).
Such talk plays well to the leftists and their supporters. It scares the crap out of gun owners who then vote in mass to purge the left. Which is why the democrats are screaming at the left (especially the news media) to shut up about gun control. And about impeachment. it is very possible that the democrats could really see themselves destroyed this fall due to talk of gun control and impeachment.
An all at once outright ban on all firearms, you are correct, can't happen without severe repercussions.
First the standard capacity magazines, then features, then specific models, then classes, then action type, then require more hoops and hurdles to jump through to buy one and store it, restrictions on how may you can by in a calendar year, total you may possess.....Frog in a pot.
Sticks Wrote:An all at once outright ban on all firearms, you are correct, can't happen without severe repercussions.
Can't happen, period. No Congress critters would vote for an across-the-board ban. Heck, such a proposed law wouldn't even get to a vote.
Sticks Wrote:First the standard capacity magazines, then features, then specific models, then classes, then action type, then require more hoops and hurdles to jump through to buy one and store it, restrictions on how may you can by in a calendar year, total you may possess.....Frog in a pot.
stanc Wrote:Can't happen, period. No Congress critters would vote for an across-the-board ban. Heck, such a proposed law wouldn't even get to a vote.
.
Feinstein would, along with probably at least 2 dozen more. It could make it to the floor for a vote attached to another "If you want to find out what's in it, you have to pass it first" or some other monolithic bill that the congress critters have their millennial interns read for them.
