Official Stop OBAMA Express!!!

I said this on my thread;  

What will Obama DO about the gun problem?

 

nothing, the Democrats are still trying their 50 state strategy and besides his 'clinging to guns and religion' statement, he has really done nothing to make a gun control advocate feel any better. 

I can respect the truth.

Just say this.


I love my guns so much that I'm okay with lots of gun deaths and massacres every year. 

Hopefully my family won't get killed at the mall, or my kid at school, but don't try to take away my toys-  they matter more.  

5 stars, very very well put. This may as well be Obama and Demo Party Leaders slogan as well.

Gun Control would have stopped massacre? Really? How?

Facts are coming out on this unthinkable tragedy...we now know the guns used were bought and registerred by the mother...we also know the killer tried to buy a rifle within week of tragedy and was DENIED by Ct law! Obviously, a background check flagged something...probably his label of autism...  

Maybe there is a law which doesn't allow one to bring guns into a home where a mentally ill person resides? I know that would be very difficult to enforce, but with people just knowing about the law - it may have prevented the Mom from even making the decision to buy the guns.

 

If a proposed solution to this crime and others is to confiscate law abiding citizens right to gun ownership...then there will be a real chit storm ahead...and is not the answer.

 . You either go house to house and raid and confiscate or you allow anarchy on the streets and in our schools and malls, like we have now.

I'm for confiscating. 

If a proposed solution to this crime and others is to confiscate law abiding citizens right to gun ownership...then there will be a real chit storm ahead...and is not the answer.

 . You either go house to house and raid and confiscate or you allow anarchy on the streets and in our schools and malls, like we have now.

I'm for confiscating. 

I do realize that taking the guns away from our citizenry leaves us little chance in fighting back against our Government by us using conventional weapons ( and that the militia's would be super p.o.'d ), but we'd just have to make do like Ghandi and try and effect political change from sheer force of will.
 

As if that guy Joe from down the street's arsenal of 4 AK 47s and assorted handguns are going to help anyway? 

 . You either go house to house and raid and confiscate or you allow anarchy on the streets and in our schools and malls, like we have now.

I'm for confiscating. 

Prof...good luck with that one...first whisper of such an over reaching approach will have every gun owner hiding their weapons...or you will have violence aimed at the ones trying to confiscate...

Do you really want that?

BTW, why don't the feds try this approach first on the violent gangs of the country...we'll see success or failure right away don't you think?

Prof...good luck with that one...first whisper of such an over reaching approach will have every gun owner hiding their weapons...or you will have violence aimed at the ones trying to confiscate...
----------------
at least that way the only people hiding guns will be the ones smart enough tto know to hide them. If one is not smart enough tot hide them first, then they really are too dumb to own one at all.

Do you really want that?

BTW, why don't the feds try this approach first on the violent gangs of the country...we'll see success or failure right away don't you think?
--------------------------------
fine by me, as long as we start somewheres 

at least that way the only people hiding guns
-------------

should read: 'the only people holding, not hiding,
cripes this coffee is too weak this morning.

prediction:
GB 34 Bears 17

and then the Cards shut the doors for good on Bears' playoff hopes next week .... 

at least that way the only people hiding guns
-------------

should read: 'the only people holding, not hiding,
cripes this coffee is too weak this morning.

prediction:
GB 34 Bears 17

and then the Cards shut the doors for good on Bears' playoff hopes next week .... 

prof...I like your prediction however, we always have close games in Chicago...

my score...GB 27 DaBears 23

and what the hell happened to the Cards this year...played so well and were 4-0 and now? as Chuck Barkley would say...just turrable!

[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201
2/12/16/michigan-hot-dog-guy-gettin
g-new-digs-after-protesters-destroy
ed-his-supplies/]

Great news...after union thugs destroyed his property...this happens! Way to go!

prof...I like your prediction however, we always have close games in Chicago...

my score...GB 27 DaBears 23

and what the hell happened to the Cards this year...played so well and were 4-0 and now? as Chuck Barkley would say...just turrable!
---------------

idk abt the Cards, i changed over to rooting for them when they were 4-0 and then , this ... i am obv to blame .
It has nothing to do with running out 3 seperate QBs who all suck in their very own special way ... 

still clinging i see.

---

For the 20 children in CT, and the countless innocent bystander children in gamg infested areas who die every day and night it's already too late.

But it's not too late to help out other potential victims of gun violence, and this Judge is moving us away from doing that. 

Clinging to what? Stricter gun control like abolishing conceal carry permits would have done absolutely zilch in stopping Lanza from doing what he did. It wouldn't have stopped James Holmes, Jacob Tyler Roberts, Jared Laughner, Seung-Hui Cho or any other of these nutjobs that do these kinds of massacres either.

And now gun control advocates have to work harder to win their ultimate goal of removing guns from the hands of crazy nutjobs like Lanza beecause of idoitic decisions like this one. 

The problem with guys like this, Lanza in particular, is that the guns weren't his in the first place. They belonged to his mother. For all intents and purposes a perfectly law abiding citizen.

Now the reports are that Lanza lived with his mother and he had a personality disorder. If these reports are true then I absolutely 100% agree that stricter regulations on gunowners need to be put in place to make sure that the guns they own cannot fall into the hands of mentally unstable people living in their homes.

Do you ever wonder why so many innocent children in the inner cities die from bullets not meant for them?

A lot of the time it's because gangbangers use biullets which are niot meant for the guns they are using, so the bullets travel in haphazard directions.

As for innocent children being killed in inner cities by gang violence, no amount of gun legislation is going to prevent that. Gangs don't give two chits about the law as it is so you can be damned sure they're not going through legal channels to purchase their guns and unless you actively look at every single person you pass on the street looking for odd bulges in their clothing the odds of you spotting someone carrying a concealed weapon are probably pretty slim.

This is real life (and death), tired old 2nd amendment arguments are not going to win the day any longer.

I'm all for some stricter regulation so the above statement goes out the window, but unless you're talking about the abolishment of the 2nd Amendment, banning of every single solitary gun, and a zero tolerance approach to enforcement then there's simply no way to prevent every incident like this from occurring. Even then it doesn't prevent the illegal aspects of gun violence.

I do realize that taking the guns away from our citizenry leaves us little chance in fighting back against our Government by us using conventional weapons ( and that the militia's would be super p.o.'d ), but we'd just have to make do like Ghandi and try and effect political change from sheer force of will.
 

As if that guy Joe from down the street's arsenal of 4 AK 47s and assorted handguns are going to help anyway? 

It's not just about Americans being able to protect themselves against their government, but it's also about Constitutional freedom in general. You're not only talking about taking away the types of guns that can be used in this type of massacre, but guns that perfectly legal citizens use for completely legal things, like hunting.

Even if they wanted to the federal government cannot just pass legislation to rid the country of guns and gun ownership, an amendment must be introduced and passed by 3/5 states ratification.

The odds of that happening, even with the current stories in the headlines, are in the negative percentages.

Prof...good luck with that one...first whisper of such an over reaching approach will have every gun owner hiding their weapons...or you will have violence aimed at the ones trying to confiscate...
----------------
at least that way the only people hiding guns will be the ones smart enough tto know to hide them. If one is not smart enough tot hide them first, then they really are too dumb to own one at all.

Wait, so you're okay with people illegally hiding guns when the government storms in to confiscate them as long as the person was smart enough to hide them in the first place? LOL

BTW, why don't the feds try this approach first on the violent gangs of the country...we'll see success or failure right away don't you think?
--------------------------------
fine by me, as long as we start somewheres

I'm betting on failure and on a large scale. Possibly on a higher scale than the so-called War on Drugs. The first time the Feds do a raid every other gun owner, legal or otherwise, that's "smart" enough to hide their guns will do so and unless the agents doing the raiding have Jedi powers there's no way they'll find them all.

Even if they wanted to the federal government cannot just pass legislation to rid the country of guns and gun ownership, an amendment must be introduced and passed by 3/5 states ratific

Then the government would have to confiscate them---good luck with that one.   Another issue....I know gunsmiths.   Even if all the guns were confiscated, there are still people with the machines and tools and materials to make more.   And they would.

Then the government would have to confiscate them---good luck with that one.   Another issue....I know gunsmiths.   Even if all the guns were confiscated, there are still people with the machines and tools and materials to make more.   And they would.

Not just that, but the blackmarket for guns from international sources would explode.

They belonged to his mother. For all intents and purposes a perfectly law abiding citizen.

A survivalist who had too much fire power and probably did not have them secured.

no amount of gun legislation is going to prevent that

are you sure?  Don't try anything because shick doesn't think it would work.  shick, instead of criticizing every suggestion, spend time trying to suggest something that will work.

unless you actively look at every single person you pass on the street looking for odd bulges

I do do that when I walk in the inner city.  It must have worked for me.

They belonged to his mother. For all intents and purposes a perfectly law abiding citizen.

A survivalist who had too much fire power and probably did not have them secured.

I agree that given her son's mental problems she should have secured her guns properly or remived them entirely.

no amount of gun legislation is going to prevent that

are you sure?  Don't try anything because shick doesn't think it would work.  shick, instead of criticizing every suggestion, spend time trying to suggest something that will work.

I have never said don't do anything. I have agree with some common sense legislation suggestions, but by all means BB, don't let facts get you off of your soap box. 

I like how you cherrypicked that one bit of a much larger post to try to paint it in a way that it wasn't meant. I was specifically talking about children being killed in inner cities by gang violence. Gangs aren't exactly known for abiding by the law, so please BB, explain to all of us which laws need to be in place to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns. 

It must have worked for me.

Why because no one killed in a massacre? 

but it's also about Constitutional freedom in general.

bullcaca, shick.  What is freedom?  Own tanks, missile-launchers, nukes?  We restrict them.  So increasing restrictions does not affect your "freedom".

but guns that perfectly legal citizens use for completely legal things, like hunting.

Which guns and why do citizens need them?  You want to use sweeping generalizations for your rebuttal.  Be specific.  Let's have a real discussion of what is really needed and what are dangerous toys.

an amendment must be introduced and passed by 3/5 states ratification.

shick, how did you get out of Prof's post that he wants to get rid of all guns.  Oh, I see another red herring.  Did you notice that he talked about people using conventional weapons?  Let's have a conversation about what are conventional weapons  Why do we need more than that unless you are a nutjob survivalists who give their kids an opportunity to kill 27 people within minutes.

bullcaca, shick.  What is freedom?  Own tanks, missile-launchers, nukes?  We restrict them.  So increasing restrictions does not affect your "freedom".

BB, I have said and I will continue to say that I have no problems with common sense legislation and restrictions, why you cannot or will not get that through your head is a mystery.

Of course people should not be able to own tanks and missile launchers, but .22 rifles and 9mm handguns? Of course they should. 

Which guns and why do citizens need them?  You want to use sweeping generalizations for your rebuttal.  Be specific.  Let's have a real discussion of what is really needed and what are dangerous toys.

I'm admittedly not a gun expert and given the multitude of types of guns out there it would be monumental to get into those kinds of specifics here. 

shick, how did you get out of Prof's post that he wants to get rid of all guns.  Oh, I see another red herring.  Did you notice that he talked about people using conventional weapons?  Let's have a conversation about what are conventional weapons  Why do we need more than that unless you are a nutjob survivalists who give their kids an opportunity to kill 27 people within minutes.

BB, if you follow the converstion between Toy and Prof, and not just one post, you'd see that that is where the topic was heading.

Here:

Toy: If a proposed solution to this crime and others is to confiscate law abiding citizens right to gun ownership...then there will be a real chit storm ahead...and is not the answer.

Prof: You either go house to house and raid and confiscate or you allow anarchy on the streets and in our schools and malls, like we have now.

I'm for confiscating. 

 

you'd see that that is where the topic was heading.
now shick knows where conversations are going and he uses an "if" and "not the answer" as his proof on where the conversation is going.  No wonder he has no clue about the conversations on here.

now shick knows where conversations are going and he uses an "if" and "not the answer" as his proof on where the conversation is going. No wonder he has no clue about the conversations on here.

Auntie Em it's a twister, it's a twister!