Gun Control Now!

[Valley Oak]

On December 14, 2012, a gunman entered the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and opened fire, killing 26 people, 20 of whom were children. Completely innocent unarmed victims.

Columbine. Red Lake Minnesota. Essex Vermont. Lancaster. Aurora. Virginia Tech. To name a few. How many more innocents must die at the hands of an antiquated and oft-misinterpreted amendment? Enough.

It's time to stop the violence.

Gun Control doesn't have to mean no guns. I'm not suggesting we take guns away. I'm suggesting we put tighter controls on acquiring and owning them. Gun show loopholes must be stopped. Ammunition should not be sold online. Mandatory wait periods should be enforced during which time a thorough background check, psychological and medical evaluation and character references should be completed. More accountability should be placed in the hands of retailers. When patrons refuse wait periods, authorities should be notified. Training and testing should be mandatory, as should a renewal process that includes many of the above-mentioned evaluation terms.

Gun owners and non-gun owners need to come together and agree on regulations that protect the right to own a firearm for sane, responsible adults and keep them out of the hands of the mentally unstable.

I would hope that we could all agree to submit ourselves to these terms when it's easier to go to a gun show and pick up a firearm than it is to go to the local pharmacy and buy cold medication. Acquiring and owning a gun should be at least as controlled as getting a learner's permit, license and privilege to drive a car.

Gun control alone is not the whole of the solution, but it's a start. And if it keeps guns out of the hands of even one mentally unstable person and saves one sweet life, it's worth it.

[Scooter]

I for one will be keeping my guns to protect myself from the emotionally disturbed people like Ed. He obviously can't have a discussion without resorting to violence.

[Valley Oak]

It's funny to see how people who are against gun control will always try to change the subject.

[Barry]

Please refrain from poking each other, including referencing any perceived taunts from earlier in this thread.

[handy]

A bit of tongue in cheek sarcasm for your perusal and consideration. I love this guy!

https://lewrockwell.com/reed/reed247.htmlThe New Soviet Asylum

by Fred Reed

Recently by Fred Reed: Dulce et Decorum

Today I’m going to explain why gun-control is not only entirely reasonable but also certain to be effective. Only the ignorant can deny this.

First, some orientation. Cement-headed NRA types need to recognize, and state manfully, that the illegalization of guns is in fact perfectly practical. History has shown this repeatedly. When the government outlaws something that huge numbers of people very much want, the outlawed items immediately disappear from society. This has been shown countless times.

When Washington outlawed alcohol, booze vanished overnight and everyone stopped drinking. Can anyone deny this? When Washington banned the use of cannabis, all of those of us made insane by Reefer Madness quit smoking dope, and today there is probably not a town in America in which one might buy a joint. Similarly, Washington made illegal the downloading of copyrighted music – which also stopped immediately. No one now has illegal music. Ask your adolescent daughter.

So with guns. They are small, easily smuggled, of high value to criminals and will be of higher value when only criminals have them, so it is virtually certain that they will vanish when the government says so.

Mexico, where I live, has stringent laws against guns, which have proved at least a partial success. Criminals have AKs, RPGs, and grenades, while nobody else has anything. That’s a partial success, isn’t it?

While I am in favor of illegalizing guns and thus ending crime, I think the principle should be democratically applied. Let us begin by disarming the Pentagon. If this seems unreasonable, ask yourself: who kills more children in a month, Ritalin-addled little boys in America, or the US Air Force in every Moslem country it has heard of? All I ask is an honest body count. I will accept your numbers.

But let’s ask the question which, being critical, ain’t asked....

Continues at https://lewrockwell.com/reed/reed247.html

[podfish]

A bit of tongue in cheek sarcasm for your perusal and consideration. I love this guy!
... When the government outlaws something that huge numbers of people very much want, the outlawed items immediately disappear from society. This has been shown countless times.
When Washington outlawed alcohol, booze vanished overnight and everyone stopped drinking.

I don't know, I like Dave Barry a lot more. His straw-man caricatures aren't quirky enough to catch my imagination.
And of course, that's all he's using - taking things to absurd extremes and making specious analogies. If the criteria for taking action is that a problem is completely solved, there won't be much action.
and somehow I don't think that arming the population in Mexico would bother the Zetas all that much. It'd just give them easier access to guns - they wouldn't need to get them from the US.

[Valley Oak]

Thank you, Podfish. I had never heard of Dave Barry before. So, I looked up Dave Barry's website and blog:

https://www.davebarry.com
AND:
https://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog

I like Barry's fresh, humorous perspective on things.

Edward

I don't know, I like Dave Barry a lot more. His straw-man caricatures aren't quirky enough to catch my imagination.
And of course, that's all he's using - taking things to absurd extremes and making specious analogies. If the criteria for taking action is that a problem is completely solved, there won't be much action.
and somehow I don't think that arming the population in Mexico would bother the Zetas all that much. It'd just give them easier access to guns - they wouldn't need to get them from the US.

[handy]

Thank you, Podfish. I had never heard of Dave Barry before. So, I looked up Dave Barry's website and blog:

https://www.davebarry.com
AND:
https://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog

I like Barry's fresh, humorous perspective on things.

Edward

Oh, come on, Edward. Tell us how you REALLY feel.

Edward, You're a gutless, ignorant, namecalling piece of shit, and I'll say it to your face, in public.

Here is the edit this little prick sent to my personal email.

--------------------------------------------

From: Edward Mendoza
Category: National Politics
Thread:Gun Control Now!

Thank you, Podfish. I had never heard of Dave Barry before. So, I looked up Dave Barry's website and blog:

https://www.davebarry.com
AND:
https://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog

I like Barry's fresh, humorous perspective on things as opposed to a redneck fascist/Libertarian gun-toting jingoist bigot homophobe like Fred Red.

-----------------------------------------

Barry, I'd like to hear your input on this. I try to be civil, but sometimes....

Best regards, and thanks,

[podfish]

... a redneck fascist/Libertarian gun-toting jingoist bigot homophobe like Fred Red.

I take it you don't share that perspective on Freddy??

[handy]

I don't know, I like Dave Barry a lot more.

I like Dave Barry, too. Different genre. I like Lewis Black, George Carlin, Doug Stanhope and Chris Cantwell, too.

[handy]

I take it you don't share that perspective on Freddy??

You call that a perspective?

[Barry]

Oh, come on, Edward. Tell us how you REALLY feel.

Edward, You're a gutless, ignorant, namecalling piece of shit, and I'll say it to your face, in public.

Here is the edit this little prick sent to my personal email.

--------------------------------------------

From: Edward Mendoza
Category: National Politics
Thread:Gun Control Now!

Thank you, Podfish. I had never heard of Dave Barry before. So, I looked up Dave Barry's website and blog:

https://www.davebarry.com
AND:
https://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog

I like Barry's fresh, humorous perspective on things as opposed to a redneck fascist/Libertarian gun-toting jingoist bigot homophobe like Fred Red.

-----------------------------------------

Barry, I'd like to hear your input on this. I try to be civil, but sometimes....

Best regards, and thanks,

First, some technical explanation: The version that you received in your email, Handy, was a copy of Edward's public reply. Everybody who is subscribed to this thread for instant email updates (because of having posted to this thread or offerred gratitude on this thread) was sent a copy of that. Edward later edited his post.

Secondly, a confession: I have only skimmed this thread. It started when I was sick with the flu and I can't bring my self to go back and read it all.

While I have more space for name-calling of non-local public people, Edward's language did push it pretty far. As with dealing with members, please address the person's words or actions, rather than the person themselves and be specific.

Earlier in the thread I seem to remember offense being taken when it was not clearly being intended. Emotions have flared and sensitivities are raw on all sides. I'm glad there are no physical guns involved.

I'm not going try to parse out lapses of decorum any further, though I'm sure there's more on this thread. If it continues is this vein, I'm going to have to close the thread for the sake of rest of the community. Please settle down.

This discussion should be about ideas, values, policy, and compromise. It should not be about people. Please only continue if you can exercise some restraint and respect.

[sandoak]

Discussions can be informative to wacco readers, or they can evolve to a point where the enthusiastic parties might better continue their talk over tea or coffee. I would hope they would be cordial in a place of public refreshment.

Meanwhile, folks may be interested to know that someone started a petition on SignOn, calling for WalMart to join Dick's Sporting Goods in voluntarily stopping sales of assault weapons: https://signon.org/sign/tell-wal-mar...ource=homepage.

[Valley Oak]

Thank you, Sandy. I signed the petition!

This is the kind of constructive action that needs to be taken, not the squabbling over the 2nd Amendment or about whether or not to do anything at all.

Edward

Discussions can be informative to wacco readers, or they can evolve to a point where the enthusiastic parties might better continue their talk over tea or coffee. I would hope they would be cordial in a place of public refreshment.

Meanwhile, folks may be interested to know that someone started a petition on SignOn, calling for WalMart to join Dick's Sporting Goods in voluntarily stopping sales of assault weapons: https://signon.org/sign/tell-wal-mar...ource=homepage.

[handy]

Thanks, Barry,

First, some technical explanation: The version that you received in your email, Handy, was a copy of Edward's public reply. Everybody who is subscribed to this thread for instant email updates (because of having posted to this thread or offerred gratitude on this thread) was sent a copy of that. Edward later edited his post.

I received the short version of his reply through the instant updates, as you said. The edit, with his hateful spew, was sent to me personally. I referred it back to the thread because I think his hatefulness should be public knowledge. Has anyone else here experienced this?

Secondly, a confession: I have only skimmed this thread. It started when I was sick with the flu and I can't bring my self to go back and read it all.

Boo, Flu! Hope you're feeling better.

While I have more space for name-calling of non-local public people, Edward's language did push it pretty far. As with dealing with members, please address the person's words or actions, rather than the person themselves and be specific.

Fair enough. Thanks. Although I thought I was being pretty specific...

To Edward: Anytime you send a modified answer to me personally, I will refer it back to the community thread. If you're going to be two-faced in your communication (attempts), I'm going to keep it public.

[podfish]

... I received the short version of his reply through the instant updates, as you said. The edit, with his hateful spew, was sent to me personally..

I think Barry's explanation is correct; I got it too.
As you may have noticed, I frequently post without thinking, and have had to go back and edit. I've exploited the fact that only those already subscribed to the thread in question, plus those who by my bad luck use the site to read the post directly in the short time interval between thought and rethought, ever see the more poorly-expressed of the two posts. So I read the difference between the two versions as a cooler head prevailing...

(DAMN! an unintentional example! my grammar sucks... I had to go add the definite particle to my phrase...)

[Valley Oak]

.
Frustrated Wayne LaPierre of NRA Thought Murder Of 20 Children By Crazed Gunman Would Have Blown Over By Now
ISSUE 49•02 • Jan 7, 2013



FAIRFAX, VA—More than three weeks after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, annoyed NRA president Wayne LaPierre told reporters Monday that while he understands the seriousness of the tragedy, he had only assumed the senseless murder of 20 first-graders and six educators by a mentally unstable gunman would have blown over by now.

Noting that the massacre was “almost a month ago” and that all of the victims had been laid to rest, the frustrated lobbyist said he couldn’t help but think the nation’s continued efforts to mourn victims and its protracted discussions of gun control were “a little much” at this point.

“I get that this horrible thing happened and all these kids are dead now, but honestly, how long are we going to keep talking about this?” the gun advocate said as he scanned a recent editorial on weapons permits, adding that “enough’s enough, you know?” “Everywhere I go it’s Newtown this, Newtown that. Meanwhile, it’s 2013, and we’re still talking about some shooting that happened last year. Seriously, move on already.”

“I mean, jeez, it’s not as if talking about them will bring them back,” he added. “Let’s just get over it.”

The longtime NRA head acknowledged that as someone who has followed dozens of mass shootings over the years, he had anticipated roughly a week or so of mourning following the deadly tragedy, but “nothing like this, for God’s sake.”

In addition, LaPierre said he was deeply surprised and even somewhat irritated that discussion concerning the heartbreaking loss of young life and the efficacy of existing gun control laws had continued to persist into the new year “as if people had nothing better to do.”

“Look, I get it: A bunch of kids died, and it’s really fucking sad or whatnot, and blah blah blah, but it’s not the end of the world here, people—the beat goes on,” a visibly agitated LaPierre said. “Hell, people die in car accidents every day, and we don’t make a big stink about that. We don’t shut down—just totally shut down—everything for weeks so we can talk about it over and over and over again, do we? Of course not. Oh, but I guess I’m the bad guy for suggesting we get our priorities straight and stop acting like a bunch of mewling babies because of 20 dead kids. Is that it? I’m the bad guy?”

“Yeah, I’m the bad guy,” he added. “Fine.”

[sharingwisdom]

What you quote are not facts to me. I don't subscribe to 5 corporate news service reporting of what happened in CT (anymore than I did about the 911 which I wrote about on this forum in '01). Ever hear of a false flag event? Ever hear of the movie, ‘Wag the Dog’? I've been collecting a great deal of information around CT and CO. that is leading in a direction that is not going to be comfortable for many people. There are too many discrepancies in the stories, from multiple shooters, to the car in the parking lot where the rifle was found not being Lanza's car, to the FBI failing to recover data from Lanza's computer though they could have, to police arresting a second man (on video), to the little 6 year old, Emily, who supposedly died but shows up two days later in a picture with the President. (And this is only the tip of the iceberg) There are many people, like in 911, that are calling for an independent investigation. My FB newsfeed is being supplied with great resources.

CT already had assault rifle gun control law. It was more strict than 1994 assault rifle bill. They also had a registration and people had to bring the guns to the state police barracks and be fingerprinted.

When the Occupy Movement was strong, many were up in arms (hands, not guns) about deception in the instigation of violence. In fact, articles were recently posted on this forum about the FBI setting up the violence. Well, why do you think things would change any differently? It's an established pattern for those who can see beyond the medias' propaganda.

I know Ted Gunderson personally (former head of LA FBI agency), and we've talked about all this. And I've talked to CIA agents. I just finished discussing this with a friend who is a police officer in another city in California. His police units don't trust the feds either and know that this is a set-up to get the guns away. A North Carolina Police Lieutenant just gave first hand knowledge of preparations being made within his own department to train and prepare for martial law in the US. And in Paragould, Arkansas there is martial law.
https://www.paragoulddailypress.com/...1511092932.txt

Diane Feinstein is setting up a bill to water down the 2nd amendment even though she had (or still has) a concealed gun permit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1EO...ature=youtu.be
AND Harry Reid is on You Tube talking to the Clarke County Shooting Park saying that he carries a gun everywhere he goes and how important having one is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=flbzbFbKxK0

I have videos and articles of regular citizens who stopped robberies and slaughters that would have killed many if they didn't have a gun. I don't own a gun, but I will stand for We the People to keep our constitution intact.

From Wm Cooper's 1991 book, Behold a Pale Horse. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater
"…programs were put in place to create a dependent, non-working element in our society. The government then began to remove these programs to force people into criminal class that did not exist in the 50’s and 60’s.
The government encourages the manufacture and importation of military firearms for the criminals to use. This is to foster a feeling of insecurity, which would lead the American people to voluntarily disarm themselves by passing laws against firearms. Using drugs and hypnosis on mental patients in a process called Orion, the CIA inoculated the desire in these people to open fire in schoolyards and thus inflame the anti-gun lobby. This plan is well under way, and so far is working perfectly. The middle class is begging the government to do away with the 2^nd amendment.”


Why do 'They' want Americans disarmed ? - Aug 23, 1991 William Cooper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=wb_OyFTi6QY

On December 14, 2012, a gunman entered the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and opened fire, killing 26 people, 20 of whom were children. Completely innocent unarmed victims.

Columbine. Red Lake Minnesota. Essex Vermont. Lancaster. Aurora. Virginia Tech. To name a few. How many more innocents must die at the hands of an antiquated and oft-misinterpreted amendment? Enough.

It's time to stop the violence.

Gun Control doesn't have to mean no guns. I'm not suggesting we take guns away. I'm suggesting we put tighter controls on acquiring and owning them. Gun show loopholes must be stopped. Ammunition should not be sold online. Mandatory wait periods should be enforced during which time a thorough background check, psychological and medical evaluation and character references should be completed. More accountability should be placed in the hands of retailers. When patrons refuse wait periods, authorities should be notified. Training and testing should be mandatory, as should a renewal process that includes many of the above-mentioned evaluation terms.

Gun owners and non-gun owners need to come together and agree on regulations that protect the right to own a firearm for sane, responsible adults and keep them out of the hands of the mentally unstable.

I would hope that we could all agree to submit ourselves to these terms when it's easier to go to a gun show and pick up a firearm than it is to go to the local pharmacy and buy cold medication. Acquiring and owning a gun should be at least as controlled as getting a learner's permit, license and privilege to drive a car.

Gun control alone is not the whole of the solution, but it's a start. And if it keeps guns out of the hands of even one mentally unstable person and saves one sweet life, it's worth it.

[Valley Oak]

.
Here are some more folks who are also adamant about possessing Assault Rifles:
.

.
https://www.splcenter.org/get-inform...-notorious-kla
.
Kentucky Supreme Court Upholds SPLC’s Crushing Legal Victory Against Notorious Klan Leader

The SPLC’s case against the Klansmen responsible for the savage beating of a Latino teen concluded with a victory this week when the Kentucky Supreme Court refused to reconsider a verdict against the former leader of the Imperial Klans of America (IKA).

Ron Edwards, the former IKA leader, had appealed his $1.3 million share of a $2.5 million verdict awarded to Jordan Gruver after a trial in November 2008.

On the eve of trial, a book written by a former FBI agent came out that said Edwards was involved in a plot to kill SPLC founder and chief counsel Morris Dees when Dees was involved in a separate trial against the Aryan Nations in Idaho.

“Ron Edwards deliberately unleashed violent racists on an unsuspecting public, and Jordan Gruver paid the price,” said SPLC President Richard Cohen. “With this final ruling, the courts have rightfully held him accountable. This serves as a warning to other hate group leaders.”

The SPLC’s verdict against Edwards and one of his chief Klan lieutenants, Jarred Hensley, decimated the IKA.

As “imperial wizard” of the IKA, Edwards once sat atop a sprawling Klan organization. Based at a rural 15-acre compound in Dawson Springs, Ky., the IKA once had chapters in 25 states. The group hosted an annual gathering known as Nordic Fest, which brought together racist skinheads, neo-Nazis and Klansmen to network and listen to performances by hate rock bands. Speakers at the gathering called for the deaths of Latinos and Jews.

Today, because of the SPLC’s lawsuit, the IKA has been reduced to two chapters. Edwards is serving time in federal prison on gun and drug charges unrelated to the SPLC case.

Gruver, a U.S. citizen of Panamanian-Indian descent, was 16 when he was attacked by IKA members who were on a recruiting mission at a county fair in Brandenburg, Ky., in July 2006.

Unprovoked, the Klansmen threw whisky in his face, called him an “illegal spic” and beat him to the ground, kicking him with steel-toe boots as he curled into a fetal position and prayed for his survival. One of the Klansmen stood 6-foot-5 and weighed 300 pounds – towering over Gruver, who is only 5-foot-3 and weighed 150 pounds.

Gruver suffered injuries that included a broken jaw, broken teeth and permanent nerve damage. Doctors also diagnosed him with post-traumatic stress disorder, a condition that plagued the teen with nightmares and flashbacks.

[Shandi]

I'd love to see a "face analysis" of this guy.

Wayne LaPierre of NRA

[Valley Oak]

This is just a parody published by "The Onion:"
https://www.theonion.com/articles/fr...-20-chi,30813/

The Onion is a humor and satirical publication available online that goes well beyond stretching the truth to even completely fabricating entire stories. The purpose of The Onion is to provide comedic relief and satirizing personalities, issues, and events to the point of being totally absurd. Therein lies the humor, which is why I posted it here.

The NRA leader's face is real, though, so an analysis would still be a good idea.

I'd love to see a "face analysis" of this guy.

[Valley Oak]

.
Here is Roxanna Green, who lost her daughter to gun violence during the Gabrielle Giffords shooting in 2011. This is her message to us:


.
My nine-year-old daughter, Christina-Taylor Green, was murdered with a gun in Tucson, Arizona two years ago today.

Since that day, far too many families have gone through similar pain.

Families in Aurora, Colorado. Families in Newtown, Connecticut. Families of the 33 people who are murdered with guns every single day across America.

How many more families need to feel that pain before our leaders take action? What will it take for them to find the courage to stand up to the gun lobby?

Today, please watch the TV ad I made with Mayors Against Illegal Guns and join me in calling on your leaders in Congress to Demand A Plan to end gun violence.

Thank you for supporting families like mine whose loved ones were murdered with guns,

Roxanna Green
Mayors Against Illegal Guns

We need legislation that will:

1. Require criminal background checks for ALL gun sales, including private sales
2. Ban assault weapons, including high-capacity magazines
3. Make gun trafficking a federal crime

[Barry]

More voices that demand a plan:

[Eryn Maddy]

You are brainwashed into believing ridiculous points of so-called fact.
Here is the real facts,

MEXICO- COMPLETE CIVILIAN GUN BAN
Highest crime rate in the world
The corrupt government and the gangs have complete control and are making billions a day. All forms of trafficking. I wonder if the U.S. has anything to do with all this death..
Oh wait we did all that, I forgot. And still drugs fill the streets. You have no idea.

UNITED KINGDOM has more total crime than ever now with their gun bans, very little shootings but the crazy people have proven that LESS GUNS EQUALS MORE CRIME

LESS GUNS EQUALS MORE CRIME!! LOOK IT UP cause I bet you never have.

And do you really think gangsters will ever give their guns away?
No.
No amount of legislation or imprisonment will stop them.
I bet you have never looked at how many pointless deaths have been prevented by armed citizens. I bet that is hard to find.
One would really have to stop reading mainstream newspapers to actually grow half a brain nowadays.

You trust in this government like a parrot to his pirate, just keep repeating the lies of your beloved Dinosaur media, they are the ones who need reevaluation.
and I am happy that not too many people are listening. Cause most people know life better than you.

Let's ban seratonin re-uptake inhibitors and the weasel media for all the insanity. And if you think shootings are bad now? BAHAAHA just wait till the government brings their newly- bought AP rounds here for my head.
I don't hate you for your beliefs, it is truly not your fault. Seriously.

By the way, give us some info instead of pulling on people's emotions. Support your statement that more guns means more crime, go ahead and try, heres mine.
And there is plenty more. People have been buying more guns in these years so you know

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc.../violent-crime

Our second amendment rights are long overdue a reevaluation. How many more senseless and entirely PREVENTABLE shootings have to occur before we do something about Gun Control.

As a citizen and constituent of this great country, I am asking that you take a firm stand and make a positive change by restricting access to guns and saving lives.

I don't have a gun. I don't want a gun. I don't need a gun. But somehow the guns always wind up in the hands of people crazy enough to use them irresponsibly and dangerously. This HAS TO BE STOPPED.

[Valley Oak]

Another anti-gun control politician, Ron Paul, demonstrates that he is also a racist and a Confederate, who is vehemently opposed to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. States' Rights do not have greater authority than the US Constitution.

We need a federal ban on Assault Rifles because the states are too irresponsible to do so. The states cannot be trusted to do the right thing and to respect the rights of minorities, such as African-Americans and Gays, especially in the old Slave States--the Confederacy--of which Ron Paul, a "Libertarian," is so proud of...

The following article was published by News One on Jan 20, 2012:

https://newsone.com/1812845/ron-paul-made-south-was-right-civil-war-speech-with-confederate-flag/



Ron Paul’s “South Was Right” Civil War Speech With Confederate Flag

Ron Paul has made no secret the fact that he thought that the South was right in the Civil War. Here he is giving a speech in front of a giant Confederate Flag about why he believes the North was wrong in the Civil War and why the South was right.

Ron Paul is a neo-Confederate, and proud member of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, which has been labeled as a neo-Confederate organization. In the video he claims that the North should have paid to buy slaves from southern slave owners to avoid the war, rather than the South renouncing slavery. Paul also fails to bring up the fact that it was the South that started the war by attacking the North in 1861.

Ron Paul was also was the only member of congress to vote against honoring the Civil Rights Act Of 1964 on its 40th anniversary in 2004. Paul would also claim that he wouldn’t have voted for it at the time, putting him on the side of the racists in both the fight against slavery and the fight against Jim Crow segregation, the two defining struggles of Black people in America.

Several Ron Paul supporters have asked that the video be taken down, from the pro-Confederate channel, Patriot Review but Patriot Review believes that the video could help Paul win South Carolina. If they do take it down, Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has downloaded a copy of the video.

Ron Paul Was Implicated In Failed White Supremacist Island Invasion

Top 10 Racist Ron Paul Friends, Supporters

[bushin]

Thanks, Sandy.

Discussions can be informative to wacco readers, or they can evolve to a point where the enthusiastic parties might better continue their talk over tea or coffee. I would hope they would be cordial in a place of public refreshment.

Meanwhile, folks may be interested to know that someone started a petition on SignOn, calling for WalMart to join Dick's Sporting Goods in voluntarily stopping sales of assault weapons: https://signon.org/sign/tell-wal-mar...ource=homepage.

[Sara S]

Edward, this could be me! Except that I don't have an assault rifle, just a shotgun and a pistol....and my hair isn't quite that grey yet.

Just because I'm (a little) crazy, doesn't mean that I'll use my guns irresponsibly or dangerously; Michael Moore and I both still have our Junior NRA Certificates!

Sara

.
Scooter's grandmother:

[busyb555]

Thank you, Podfish. I had never heard of Dave Barry before. So, I looked up Dave Barry's website and blog:https://www.davebarry.comAND:https://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blogI like Barry's fresh, humorous perspective on things.Edward

Hi Ed.Will you read and comment to this information please?

From: https://godfatherpolitics.com/8900/f...omment-page-1/

After last summer’s shooting in Aurora, Colorado and last month’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, anti-gun advocates want you to believe that America is a nation infected with violent crimes and murders. They want you to believe that we are one, if not the, most violent nation in the world and that we have to rid the nation of guns to solve the problem.

But what are the real facts?

Amidst the Noise released a video on You Tube that provides some very stunning facts about violent crimes in the US and Great Britain that anti-gun advocates don’t want you to know this.

For instance, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports: Crime in the United States Table 1, violent crimes in the US have dropped by nearly 50% in the last twenty years. In 1992, there were 757.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people. In 2011, there were only 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 people. That’s a reduction of 49%.

In the same Table 1, we also see that there were 9.3 homicides per 100,000 people in 1992 and that number dropped to 4.7 homicides per 100,000 in 2011. That’s a reduction of 49.4% in the homicide rate in the past twenty years.

Continues at: https://godfatherpolitics.com/8900/f...omment-page-1/

[podfish]

SO many statements and all misleading. I don't want to create one of those unreadable posts with a zillion brief quotes. So let's try this format - I preserved a bunch of representative phrases:

... anti-gun advocates want you to believe that America is a nation infected with violent crimes and murders. They want you to believe that we are one, if not the, most violent nation in the world... violent crimes in the US have dropped by nearly 50% in the last twenty years... there were 762,515 violent crimes in the past year.... liberal anti-gun politicians don’t want you to know the real facts about guns and violence. If you knew the truth, they wouldn’t have any justifiable reason to try to outlaw and ban guns. All of the air goes out of their anti-gun balloon.The other truth revealed in the video is that inner-city culture is the real problem for a large percentage of the violent crimes that take place in the US. It’s not guns, it’s the people. And it’s the people who vote for Obama and others that want to ban and outlaw guns. In order to truly reduce violent crimes and deaths by guns, you have to change the culture. Unfortunately, Obama’s politics only help to reinforce the current culture and keep the people trapped in it.The inner city culture is like a frog in a pot of water..... He has no desire or intention of dealing with the real issues, but would rather use them to promote his socialistic agenda

America -is- a nation infected with violent crimes and murders. I'm glad it's not as bad as it's been, but it should be better. Many other countries are less violent. Some aren't.

.. saying (they) "don't want you to know .. facts" is a stupid argument, nearly impossible to back up. It reveals a resistance to engage in a real dialog by demonizing your opponents. And the conclusion (there's no longer a) "justifiable reason" is an indefensible claim, too. Sure there are reasons.

When dealing with phrases that are code-words for racist attitudes, it behooves you to be careful. Unless you really do mean to claim it's those inner-city black thugs who are a large percentage (and the real core) of Obama's constituency. Funny, I don't think there are all that many in that demographic, whether or not they're over-represented in gun violence. The crimes that are currently getting all the attention don't come from that demographic at all.

Frogs in hot water?? that's not really true either; a goofy folksy aphorism that you accept as a model of reality leads to a warped view of reality.

and just saying that Obama has a socialist agenda and is actually a heartless, unempathetic individual doesn't make it true. Instead, most of his most vocal opponents seem determined to come across that way themselves.

there may well be a case that gun control is unnecessary, but despite all the random stats and indefensible allegations in that post, it doesn't advance such a case at all.

[Barry]

The Second Amendment was Ratified to Preserve Slavery
https://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery
Tuesday, 15 January 2013 09:35By Thom Hartmann, Truthout | News Analysis

The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says "State" instead of "Country" (the Framers knew the difference - see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia's vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that . . . and we all should be too.

In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the "slave patrols," and they were regulated by the states.

In Georgia, for example, a generation before the American Revolution, laws were passed in 1755 and 1757 that required all plantation owners or their male white employees to be members of the Georgia Militia, and for those armed militia members to make monthly inspections of the quarters of all slaves in the state. The law defined which counties had which armed militias and even required armed militia members to keep a keen eye out for slaves who may be planning uprisings.

As Dr. Carl T. Bogus wrote for the University of California Law Review in 1998, "The Georgia statutes required patrols, under the direction of commissioned militia officers, to examine every plantation each month and authorized them to search 'all Negro Houses for offensive Weapons and Ammunition' and to apprehend and give twenty lashes to any slave found outside plantation grounds."

It's the answer to the question raised by the character played by Leonardo DiCaprio in Django Unchained when he asks, "Why don't they just rise up and kill the whites?" If the movie were real, it would have been a purely rhetorical question, because every southerner of the era knew the simple answer: Well regulated militias kept the slaves in chains.

Sally E. Haden, in her book Slave Patrols: Law and Violence in Virginia and the Carolinas, notes that, "Although eligibility for the Militia seemed all-encompassing, not every middle-aged white male Virginian or Carolinian became a slave patroller." There were exemptions so "men in critical professions" like judges, legislators and students could stay at their work. Generally, though, she documents how most southern men between ages 18 and 45 - including physicians and ministers - had to serve on slave patrol in the militia at one time or another in their lives.

And slave rebellions were keeping the slave patrols busy.

Continues at https://truth-out.org/news/item/1389...eserve-slavery