Posted on 08/11/2016 5:06:07 AM PDT by massmike
I met the suburban gun control ladies at a local farmers' market, where they were collecting signatures on a petition saying that ISIS covert operatives and paranoid schizophrenics with felony records should not be allowed to purchase tactical nuclear weapons legally.
Okay, that's a slight exaggeration.
But, based on focus group input, the gun control lobby, including Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, has softened its message. It no longer wants "gun control" – which suggests limiting the access of law-abiding citizens. Perish the thought!
Hillary Clinton articulated the new approach when she told the Democratic Nominating Convention: "I'm not looking to repeal the Second Amendment (as if she could do that unilaterally). I'm not looking to take people's guns away. But I am looking for more support for reasonable efforts that need to be undertaken to keep guns out of the wrong hands." Who could possibly oppose reasonable efforts to keep guns out of the wrong hands?
As whoppers go, Hillary's "I'm not looking to take people's guns away" is on par with, "If you like your (health care) plan, you can keep your plan." Democrats are full of glib promises about what they're not going to do to us.
When several gun-control measures were defeated in the Senate after the Orlando killings, Mrs. Clinton released a one-word statement "Enough!" That's our Hillary – a fascist of few words.
Described as "modest gun curbs" by Reuters, the Senate legislation would have "closed loopholes" (by requiring more background checks) and banned the fearsome AR-15, media-dubbed a "military-style assault weapon." The terminology is intended to blur the lines between the AR-15 (which is semi-automatic) and far more lethal weapons, like the M-16, which are fully automatic.
For the record, you can't buy a firearm at a gun shop without a background check. Democrats have extended that to include purchases at gun shows. Now, they're going after individual transactions.
So, if you want to sell your son the old .38 kicking around in your closet, you'll have to run a background check on him first. After all, he may have homicidal tendencies or be on a no-fly list. That's how absurd common sense is becoming.
No one knows how many names are on the government's terrorism watch list. It's reported that 1.5 million were added in 2015 alone.
It never releases the criteria for putting people on the list – except that it seems to be totally ineffective at tracking actual terrorists. Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who shot and killed 13 soldiers and wounded 23 at Ft. Hood in 2009, wasn't being scrutinized. His superiors kept giving him glowing evaluations, despite his vocal anti-Americanism.
No one was watching Sayede Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik, who killed 14 and injured 22 at a Christmas Party in San Bernardino last December. (Although they were suspicious as hell, they went unnoticed.) Despite warnings from Russian intelligence that the Tsarnaev brothers had ties to Chechen terrorists, the FBI wasn't watching them when they bombed the Boston Marathon on April 14, 2013. After a cursory investigation, the Bureau's Boston office closed its case file on the brothers.
Omar Mateen is the latest poster boy for background checks. While proclaiming his allegiance to ISIS, Mateen killed 49 and wounded 53 at an Orlando nightclub in June.
Forget the watch list, the no-fly list, and the additional screening list. Mateen passed two background checks far more rigorous than anything currently proposed. To get a Class D security license from the State of Florida, he passed a criminal background check and a mental health screening, submitted fingerprints and a photograph and underwent 40 hours of professional training. He also had a Class G gun permit which allowed him to carry up to two concealed weapons.
Reasonable/common sense gun legislation is championed by the party that says you're a racist if you want to limit immigration by people with names like Omar, Nidal and Sayede.
Gun control is quite possibly the greatest fraud ever perpetrated by a party notorious for its charlatans and hucksters. There are 310 million firearms in the United States. Americans are buying AR-15s at the rate of a million a year. Contrary to anti-gun mythology, as gun ownership rises, the homicide rate declines. Less than 20% of gun crimes are committed by legal owners. Most of these weapons are stolen or bought on the black market.
On November 13, 2015, 130 people were killed in shootings and explosions in Paris. Like most EU countries, France has gun laws that make California's look like they were written by the NRA.
A terrorist in Nice killed 84 people with a truck on Bastille Day. Hillary recently said that our mass public shootings "are rooted in much too readily available weapons of mass killings, usually assault weapons." But what about readily available military-style assault trucks?
When it comes to guns, no claim is too outrageous or absurd for Democrats. At a July 7 service for five police officers gunned down by those following the logic of his friends in Black Lives Matter, President Obama disclosed, "We flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book." Last year, the president claimed, "There are neighborhoods where it's easier for you to buy a handgun than it is for you to buy a fresh vegetable."
For Democrats, guns are a convenient way to change the subject.
Someone asks: "Why did Hillary Clinton have a closed-door meeting with Black Lives Matter activists?" And they reply: "Who needs an AR-15 for hunting?" You ask: "Is the $400-million ransom Obama paid to Iran, the greatest state sponsor of terrorism, funding more terrorism?" and they say, "Why should someone on a terrorist watch list be able to legally buy a gun?"
That's the Democrats – soft on crime and terrorism, hard on guns.
Go to the website of Moms Demand Action and you'll find this poignant plea: "Hatred comes in many different forms. But there's no reason why those filled with hate should have a gun."
The questionnaire used for background checks of potential gun-buyers should be amended as follows: "Are you filled with hate?" (Those who hate cops are exempted.) "Have you ever used a racial or ethnic slur?" "Have you had bad thoughts about Hillary – are you having them right now?"
Application denied.
Bad guys commit crimes.
In response bad politicians take guns from good people.
We’ve been hearing the phrase “reasonable gun control” for decades now - and it’s always, ALWAYS liberal code for elimination of the Second Amendment and all private ownership of firearms.
They need gun control because their goal is to take away all of our other rights and let the government run everyone’s life in any way they think best. The founders gave us the 2a to prevent that so Ds have to get rid of the 2a.
Ds don’t care about crime - only the votes of both criminals and victims. The more a city is a victim of crime, the more they depend on government form many reasons (e.g. from simple fear to fewer businesses/jobs in high crime areas) and vote D. Taking care of criminals (less police, lighter sentences) makes criminals happy and increases crime and thus D power.
And terrorism is “an opportunity that they can’t let go to waste”. After the Pulse shooting, Ds didn’t say “we must stop radical Muslims”. They said “we must stop guns”.
Same thing happened in this country. In 1976, Canada formally removed the death penalty from the Criminal Code but then brought in Firearms Acquisition Certificates, banned fully automatic firearms, and no longer allowed personal protection as a reason to acquire a Restricted Weapons Permit (needed for handguns). In 1994, the long gun registry was brought out by the Liberals as another distraction to it’s Young Offenders Act when a few high profile shooting incidents involving teenagers took place.
Of course Hillary and the rest of the Democrats will never “repeal” the 2nd Amd. They’ll just regulate it out of its usefulness.
In General...
Democrats use guns for crime.
Republicans use guns for sport and self defense.
That is why Democrats want gun control - they hate it when their victims shoot back.
It's a case of criminals protecting criminals.
I belong to a very exclusive imaginary club. MOMS FOR THE DEATH PENALTY. I am the mother of a child murdered with a 2 ft section of FENCE POST, plea deal brought the charge from M1 to M2 and 20 yrs in prison, only it’s not 20 yrs, first parole hearing was 10 months after sentencing, 6 hearings later for a total of 12.5 yrs and he walks the streets of TN a free man, while my physically/mentally delayed at 12, 16 year old lies in a cold grave since April 1989.
My friend’s 8 year old daughter was beat, raped, strangled almost to death, tied in a blanket, and thrown off a dock into the river in Memphis, TN in 1990 where she drowned, she’s still waiting for the Perp who has finished all his state and fed appeals to be EXECUTED!
KISS MY GRITS AND PRY MY GUN OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS!
“There are 310 million firearms in the United States.”
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/09/us-will-reach-400-million-private.html
Other than that, he hits the nail on the head. Hillary has favorably mentioned “Australian-style gun control” on several occasions. Well, guess what boys and girls, Australia CONFISCATED millions of guns in the aftermath of a bad massacre in the mid-’90s. Of course, crime has skyrocketed, because criminals ... [drumroll] ... don’t obey the law (cue Gomer Pyle).
Gun control is the 3rd rail of politics in this country, and far more. The trigger for the Revolution, the battles at Lexington and Concord, was a gun grab by the British military governor of Massachusetts. The 2nd Amendment was written by men who had fought and/or led the Revolution, and who were afraid that the powerful central government that they were creating would someday careen out of control. They wanted the American people to have the tools in their hands, and the training to use those tools, if our own government became a tyranny sometime in the future. It was written specifically to place a check on the power of politicians like Obama and Clinton.
“Of course Hillary and the rest of the Democrats will never “repeal” the 2nd Amd. They’ll just regulate it out of its usefulness.”
If they could, they would abolish 2A in a heartbeat, by executive order, and have the scotus deem it legal.
Recently watched the documentary “Cartel Land”. When a vigilante group started growing throwing out the cartel what was the government’s response. “We don’t want citizens running around with guns without a permit”.
That is so obviously laughable considering no effort has been made to disarm the cartels, who I imagine also don’t have permits. The Mexican government wants the criminal to have the upper hand, it is so obvious.
I fear this is the direction the gun grabbers want to take the US in. The only ones armed will be the government, who are doing squat to protect against the border invaders, and criminals.
You will also have to bring him to an FFL dealer so he can fill out a BATF Form 4473 and register his gun, adding it to the new National Gun Registry.
Once they know who has the guns and where they are, watch the liberals change their tune.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.