False Flag Gov't Schemes for Gun control:

[Mr MojoRisin]

Ever since President Obama took office, he has made it clear that one of his goals is to disarm the American public. Like most Progressive Liberals, he is apparently scared of an armed citizenry and what they can do. Many of the false flag shooting were characterized by lack of blood from the shooting victims. Liberals think that people who are shot don't bleed right away. The second link is of the Dallas Police involved in a shooting of a suspect armed with a screwdriver. This is an example of what a real shooting actually looks like contrary to the bullshit we saw with Sandy Hook, WDBJ7, Walter Scott just to name a few. It's time we woke up to what is really going on.

http://www.survivopedia.com/false-fl...-gun-control/#

https://youtu.be/EUp4bDa9M3o

Jim

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Ever since President Obama took office, he has made it clear that one of his goals is to disarm the American public. Like most Progressive Liberals, he is apparently scared of an armed citizenry and what they can do. Many of the false flag shooting were characterized by lack of blood from the shooting victims. Liberals think that people who are shot don't bleed right away. The second link is of the Dallas Police involved in a shooting of a suspect armed with a screwdriver. This is an example of what a real shooting actually looks like contrary to the bullshit we saw with Sandy Hook, WDBJ7, Walter Scott just to name a few. It's time we woke up to what is really going on.

http://www.survivopedia.com/false-fl...-gun-control/#

https://youtu.be/EUp4bDa9M3o

Jim

Good article, Jim...

[SpeedRacerXXX]

The first article was written by an idiot. First off, making my position clear, I am NOT in favor of banning more guns.

First, NO ONE has the goal of totally disarming the American public. We've discussed this point before and no one on the right has been able to point out a politician who has stated this as a goal. Yes, some people want additional guns banned, guns which an American citizen would not need to defend him/herself from criminals.

Second, does anyone REALLY worry about needing guns for a "second American Revolution"? If I listed the top 1,000 worries I have in my life, this would not make the list. It's not going to happen.

Third, the author's statements about Sandy Hook being all false. Another conspiracy theory probably supported by Jim. Just more paranoia. It happened. A terrible tragedy, and to say it was false is to pour salt on the wounds of those that lost loved ones. Pure bull shit by the author.

Fourth, the author's statements about veterans and senior citizens being denied their Second Amendment rights is pure bull shit too. I am both a veteran and a senior citizen and if I am shown to be mentally incompetent then it is very possible that I should be denied access to guns, the same as any other American citizen who may be denied that right. Conservatives keep saying to not ban guns but keep them out of the hands of people who are not mentally capable. And this idiot author states otherwise.

Honest gun owners???? Probably 99.99% of American gun owners are honest. No "liberal" has ever made such a ridiculous statement that "there is no such thing as an honest gun owner". I challenge anyone to back up that statement.

In summary, this is one of the worst articles I've ever seen written on gun control issues, whether by someone on the right or the left.

[Guest123018-4]

With a fgovernment that is so out of control, we may just need them for a second revolutions buty that is not the point.
It is but one point in many.l
Other than the invasion of illegal immigrants, when has the United States ever been invaded by a foreign nation intent on destroying us?
There is a very good reason much like the same reason Switzerland never gets invaded. The people are armed.

Our founding fathers had the foresight to make sure we remain armed and one of the main reasons is because they knew of the extremely high cost of a standing army. The liberals that look at our military and the Libertarians, and see how much of our taxes go to just maintain what we have should understand that the cost of removing firearms from the individuals will cause the cost of our military to skyrocket.

The problem in our nation is not guns. The , or a , problem is the lack of real opportunity for people to become successful via good jobs because of our governments meddling and over regulation. We can also blame our welfare system that drove fathers out of their homes, our education system which has been dominated by the left wing, and the lack of the individual taking responsibility for their actions because the left believes it takes a 'village".


We got lots more deep0ly rooted problems and the desire for the left to take our firearms is just a symptom of our demise.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Ever since President Obama took office, he has made it clear that one of his goals is to disarm the American public. Like most Progressive Liberals, he is apparently scared of an armed citizenry and what they can do. Many of the false flag shooting were characterized by lack of blood from the shooting victims. Liberals think that people who are shot don't bleed right away. The second link is of the Dallas Police involved in a shooting of a suspect armed with a screwdriver. This is an example of what a real shooting actually looks like contrary to the bullshit we saw with Sandy Hook, WDBJ7, Walter Scott just to name a few. It's time we woke up to what is really going on.

http://www.survivopedia.com/false-fl...-gun-control/#

https://youtu.be/EUp4bDa9M3o

Jim

LOL that rant will never get through the Van Allen belt.

[i'va biggen]

If you don't want the government to seize your guns, quit trying to sneak them on to aircraft.

http://blog.tsa.gov/2016/01/tsa-2015...in-review.html

[Yssup Rider]

You fellaz are such pussies! PUSSIES! Period.

The OP framed a lie as a fact, and now we get to hear the same mewling from the same whining pussies.

The majority of America rejects your caterwauling. Nobody wants your guns, pussies.

We just want to be safe from the idiots who wave them around at churches, and grocery stores, and Starbucks, and Macy's, and schools, and driving their cars, and sporting events, and Home Depot and...well all the places where Yosemite Sam ain't.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

[DSK]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You fellaz are such pussies! PUSSIES! Period.

The OP framed a lie as a fact, and now we get to hear the same mewling from the same whining pussies.

The majority of America rejects your caterwauling. Nobody wants your guns, pussies.

We just want to be safe from the idiots who wave them around at churches, and grocery stores, and Starbucks, and Macy's, and schools, and driving their cars, and sporting events, and Home Depot and...well all the places where Yosemite Sam ain't.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

I've never been in a single church that had people waving their guns around. Perhaps they wave their guns at you because you are an annoying, threatening social misfit!

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Ever since President Obama took office, he has made it clear that one of his goals is to disarm the American public. Like most Progressive Liberals, he is apparently scared of an armed citizenry and what they can do. Many of the false flag shooting were characterized by lack of blood from the shooting victims. Liberals think that people who are shot don't bleed right away. The second link is of the Dallas Police involved in a shooting of a suspect armed with a screwdriver. This is an example of what a real shooting actually looks like contrary to the bullshit we saw with Sandy Hook, WDBJ7, Walter Scott just to name a few. It's time we woke up to what is really going on.

http://www.survivopedia.com/false-fl...-gun-control/#

https://youtu.be/EUp4bDa9M3o

Jim

This is utter paranoid bullshit, Jim. I'm going to give Obama your name and tell him to grab your guns, because that's just how it works!

I've never seen such a bunch of chickenshit whiners in my life.

[Yssup Rider]

Of course you haven't.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You fellaz are such pussies! PUSSIES! Period.

The OP framed a lie as a fact, and now we get to hear the same mewling from the same whining pussies.

The majority of America rejects your caterwauling. Nobody wants your guns, pussies.

We just want to be safe from the idiots who wave them around at churches, and grocery stores, and Starbucks, and Macy's, and schools, and driving their cars, and sporting events, and Home Depot and...well all the places where Yosemite Sam ain't.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

Hahahaha, that's funny, it really is. You wanna be safe from all the gun wheeling motherfuckers. Have you ever wondered why your Government never talks about the nuts with guns they only talk about the guns?

Jim

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

The first article was written by an idiot. First off, making my position clear, I am NOT in favor of banning more guns.

First, NO ONE has the goal of totally disarming the American public. You want to hang your hat on that one assertion....no one? We've discussed this point before and no one on the right has been able to point out a politician who has stated this as a goal. Actually, both California senators have expressed at different times that, if possible, they would like to get rid of guns. I'll leave you that "if possible" to hide your nakedness. Yes, some people want additional guns banned, guns which an American citizen would not need to defend him/herself from criminals. How about those semi automatic shotguns that California banned?

Second, does anyone REALLY worry about needing guns for a "second American Revolution"? If I listed the top 1,000 worries I have in my life, this would not make the list. It's not going to happen. What? We already had a second American revolution, it has been called the Civil War. We're arming for the Third American Revolution.

Third, the author's statements about Sandy Hook being all false. Another conspiracy theory probably supported by Jim. Just more paranoia. It happened. A terrible tragedy, and to say it was false is to pour salt on the wounds of those that lost loved ones. Pure bull shit by the author. Yeah, probably some stupidity from the fringe. Maybe we had better send someone to Sandy Hook just to make sure as this will come up again.

Fourth, the author's statements about veterans and senior citizens being denied their Second Amendment rights is pure bull shit too. I am both a veteran and a senior citizen and if I am shown to be mentally incompetent then it is very possible that I should be denied access to guns, the same as any other American citizen who may be denied that right. Conservatives keep saying to not ban guns but keep them out of the hands of people who are not mentally capable. And this idiot author states otherwise. Not so bullshit. I've read of this in many respectable publications. If a veteran is judged to not to be able to handle his or her financial affairs then the same distrust extends to other things, like owning weapons. Also some veterans have been disarmed after seeking treatment for depression.

Honest gun owners???? Probably 99.99% of American gun owners are honest. No "liberal" has ever made such a ridiculous statement that "there is no such thing as an honest gun owner". I challenge anyone to back up that statement. I've never heard this statement before but I would have to know what the utterer meant by the word "honest".

In summary, this is one of the worst articles I've ever seen written on gun control issues, whether by someone on the right or the left.

Your opening statement indicates that you are okay with banning some guns though I'm not sure which ones you're talking about.
The second amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED but in Seattle they are putting a special tax on bullets and are discussing a tax for gun buys. Sounds like infringement to me. Imagine if had to pay a tax everything you said something bad about Obama....or George Bush?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Hahahaha, that's funny, it really is. You wanna be safe from all the gun wheeling motherfuckers. Have you ever wondered why your Government never talks about the nuts with guns they only talk about the guns?

Jim

Here is a summary of actions being proposed by the administration to curb gun violence dated January 4, 2016. Notice that NONE of the proposals speak to further gun bans.

The second link is what I believe to be an unbiased fact check on the proposals.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...e-and-make-our

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/sor...-gun-proposal/

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Here is a summary of actions being proposed by the administration to curb gun violence dated January 4, 2016. Notice that NONE of the proposals speak to further gun bans.

The second link is what I believe to be an unbiased fact check on the proposals.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...e-and-make-our

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/sor...-gun-proposal/

How does it feel to be hoist on your own petard? "Gun Violence" is the catch phrase and what do each of those proposals have to do with violence? Next to nothing really. They have to do with ownership. Background checks? First, there are background check on both gun show and internet purchases. Anyone who tells you different is lying to you. What do background check have to do with violence? Criminals (you know, bad guys) don't do background checks.
Mental health and half a billion dollars...it's not money, it's liberal laws on privacy that are going to get in the way. For instance, Obama could just order the hospitals that are tied into Obamacare to give up the information about mental illness, but that would run counter to the liberal orthodoxy of privacy.
Obey existing guns laws? Remember Fast and Furious? The White House had better start obeying the laws already on the books before they go after anyone.
Technology? Once again, criminals don't care and I don't want some cut rate computer chip second guessing my need to use lethal force in an extreme situation.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Your opening statement indicates that you are okay with banning some guns though I'm not sure which ones you're talking about.
The second amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED but in Seattle they are putting a special tax on bullets and are discussing a tax for gun buys. Sounds like infringement to me. Imagine if had to pay a tax everything you said something bad about Obama....or George Bush?

Some guns are currently banned from the average citizen -- an M-16 for example. Since I don't buy the argument that a person will ever need a gun for a future American Revolution, I don't believe a citizen has a need for an M-16 for self-defense.

I will leave it to the court system to determine the legality of gun control infringements. States have the right to enact gun control legislation as they see fit. If the voting people in that state have an issue with that legislation, they can either vote the supporters out of office or fight the legislation through the court system. Or they can move to a state which supports their position.

Your statement:

"Not so bullshit. I've read of this in many respectable publications. If a veteran is judged to not to be able to handle his or her financial affairs then the same distrust extends to other things, like owning weapons. Also some veterans have been disarmed after seeking treatment for depression".

Conservatives keep telling Liberals that the goal should not be to ban guns but rather to keep guns out of the hands of people who are deemed incompetent to own them. I agree but it is a tricky subject. There is no line in the sand as to when a person should be deemed incompetent to owning a gun. A depressed person is, IMHO, more likely to use a gun in a negative way than a non-depressed person. Maybe err on the side of caution?

Please post a link to statements made by a California Senator in which they state that they want a national ban on guns. Diane Feinstein is certainly one of the more vocal politicians on wanting increased gun control legislation but none of her statements would lead one to believe that she supports a nationwide ban on guns.

BTW, I appreciate it that you can address the issues in a gentlemanly manner unlike so many others on this forum.