The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 41    Average: 2.8/5]
104 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 9416
Rating: 2.8
Category:
Date: 02/05/13 03:30 PM

104 Responses to Sandy Hook Father Owns Congress

  1. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:17 pm
    Link: Sandy Hook Father Owns Congress - Bill Stevens, a father of a 5th grader who was not killed or injured in the Sandy Hook shooting, telling it like it is.
  2. Profile photo of beefser25
    beefser25 Male 30-39
    6 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:42 pm
    Dear friends who say we need guns to protect ourselves from the government: To beat the U.S. government, you`re gonna need bigger and better weapons than guns. Would you be in favor of legalizing civilians owning tanks, bombs, fighter planes, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons? Also, if you really believe the government is out to get you, it`s likely that you suffer from a mental illness.
  3. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:44 pm
  4. Profile photo of caper454
    caper454 Female 70 & Over
    511 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:45 pm
    AMEN! Why don`t men like this run for Congress anymore?
  5. Profile photo of Mahaloth
    Mahaloth Male 30-39
    140 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:46 pm
    Congress?
  6. Profile photo of DromEd
    DromEd Male 40-49
    1925 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 3:58 pm
    And beefser swings and misses the point entirely.
  7. Profile photo of mykunter
    mykunter Male 40-49
    2424 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:00 pm
    Bill Stevens for president.
  8. Profile photo of dirtysteve00
    dirtysteve00 Male 30-39
    373 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:03 pm
    `Endowed by our creator`
    Looool!

    Didn`t give those rights to the slaves for awhile though.

    Another tough guy who thinks he could fight a real physical attempt to remove guns.



    Not seeing the ownage here at all.
  9. Profile photo of Kain1
    Kain1 Male 18-29
    1473 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:06 pm
    "these rights are inalienable and endowed by our creator, not you politicians, to all citizens regardless of gender race or creed."

    Am i the only one who notices the multiple layers of complete idiocy of this sentence?
  10. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:13 pm
    He had a few good points but he stunk those up with the irrational argument of a state capitol having metal detectors when his elementary school didn`t. Where does that end? Do you have metal detectors on school bus doors? Armed guards on every school bus? The anti-gun restriction crowd is just as reactionary as the gun restriction crowd. You know what being reactionary gets you? A walk through airport security in your socks.
  11. Profile photo of taylor_stone
    taylor_stone Male 30-39
    2688 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:15 pm
    @beefser25

    To those individuals claiming that fighting the government is the same as fighting the military: Take it from a former soldier in the US Army... Our allegiance is to the PEOPLE, not the government. We are citizens too. If the government is encroaching upon the rights of the people, then WE are being targeted too. A majority of the military would join any revolt made by the people, not just because the obligation we swore to is to the people, but because WE ARE THE PEOPLE... Just as much as anyone else is.



    Would you have said the same thing to Pre WWII Germany? Or Russia under Stalin`s power? Or N Korea under the power of Kim Jong Il? Anyone not realizing that the government CAN be corrupt, and that it the responsibility of the people to purge it, is the one with the serious mental defect.
  12. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:19 pm
    "Bill Stevens for president."

    The thought of a president who puts his version of god above the the laws of our land scares the crap out of me.
  13. Profile photo of xCANDACEx
    xCANDACEx Female 30-39
    283 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:21 pm
    catgirl time.
  14. Profile photo of joeblowsglas
    joeblowsglas Male 30-39
    72 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:27 pm
    gross
  15. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7738 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:31 pm
    I, too, picked up on the "endowed by our creator not you politicians". So Washington and the gang are Gods now?
    And I wonder what he would have to say if little Victoria and her friends found they key to his little gun safe one day and accidently blew each other`s heads off. No nasty man to blame then...or is there, dad?
  16. Profile photo of Zuriel
    Zuriel Male 30-39
    554 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:41 pm
    @taylor_stone
    "Take it from a former soldier in the US Army... Our allegiance is to the PEOPLE, not the government."

    ..cough cough.. bullpoocough....
    i`ll believe it when i turn the news on and hear a report of some soldier refusing to send in a drone strike when civilian lives could be lost.

    go sell your self righteousness somewhere else pal

    Oh didn`t you hear in the news today, ANY american citizen world wide can be killed WITHOUT due process, if that person is suspected... SUSPECTED of having al-Qaeda involvement... NO PROOF NEEDED.

    so yea, suck on that soldier boy who believes what he`s told, you`re the worst kind of sheep
  17. Profile photo of NottaSpy
    NottaSpy Male 40-49
    881 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:53 pm
    It seems Mr. Stevens took American History, but skipped Political Science. The U.S. Constitution supersedes his State Constitution. So, while his State Constitution may not mention "well regulated", the "supreme law of the land" certainly does. Maybe he can set down his gun long enough to Google the "Supremacy Clause".
  18. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7738 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 4:55 pm
    Strong words Zuriel. Hey isn`t that the kind of argument those German citizens who signed up as Nazi`s used to justify their actions, "Not me, pal, I was just following orders".
  19. Profile photo of fancythat
    fancythat Male 30-39
    1950 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 5:14 pm
    As a CT resident, I hope this guy is prepared to stop armor piercing bullets being spewed at his house and family at a rate of 1000 rounds every minute, because with *no* legislation limiting what can be procured, that`s what the next home invader may have in their hands. ... Perhaps it`s best if we have the legislature limit what can be had by the public - oh wait, we already do, and no tyrants have stormed his castle. So, can we at least *discuss* the possibility of limiting how many rounds, or at what rate an amount of ammunition can be fired from a weapon, or are you going to take that as an insult and escalate the conversation all the way to "from my cold dead hands?"
  20. Profile photo of pirhomaniak
    pirhomaniak Male 30-39
    200 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 5:31 pm
    @fancythat Well said.
  21. Profile photo of uatme
    uatme Male 18-29
    1074 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 5:35 pm
    All I got from that was change the constitution with an amendment.
  22. Profile photo of dirtysteve00
    dirtysteve00 Male 30-39
    373 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 6:00 pm
    `To those individuals claiming that fighting the government is the same as fighting the military: Take it from a former soldier in the US Army... Our allegiance is to the PEOPLE, not the government. `

    What was the last war you fought in where the reasons were that clear-cut? The army doesn`t remove guns, the Police, ATF and Feds do.
    Armed forces would be deployed only after something way more serious, like another attempted secession.
  23. Profile photo of CaptKangaroo
    CaptKangaroo Male 50-59
    2343 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 6:07 pm
    The government has proven time and again, that your cold, dead hands are just fine by them- better to make it THEIR cold, dead hands.
  24. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 6:19 pm
    I think I know what the extreme gun nuts are afraid of and it is not this imaginary government takeover - that is just a diversion. They don`t want to get on a Federal No Sell List. I would love to see a Federal No Sell List so people like the Virginia tech shooter could have been placed on it. The thing is it will never happen because it would break so many HIPAA laws. So don`t worry, you crazy bastards are safe.
  25. Profile photo of DromEd
    DromEd Male 40-49
    1925 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 7:40 pm
    Don`t kid yourselves. There are powers at work that want to strip us of all gun rights. I`m old enough to remember..."we only want to ban smoking on short (under 2 hour air flights) flights." A few years later is was long flights, then it was all flights, then it was this part of the airport, then it was the whole airport, then it was a part of a restaurant, then it was the whole restaurant, then it was a section of a bar, then it was the whole bar, then it was go outside, then it was don`t stand more than 20 feet from the door...

    The gun issue is no different.

    So fancythat your hypothetical 1000 round perpetrator is the least of my worries. Your argument is paranoid weak sauce.
  26. Profile photo of Grommen
    Grommen Male 30-39
    16 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 8:15 pm
    @drawman61 `I, too, picked up on the "endowed by our creator not you politicians". So Washington and the gang are Gods now?`

    No, he was quoting the Declaration of Independence, which George Washington neither wrote nor signed.
  27. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 8:24 pm
    Didn`t America`s most famous sniper and another marine that were armed at a gun range just get killed?

    Explain to me again how a gun protects you. Pretty sure if those guys couldn`t protect themselves you or some school teacher have f.uck all of a chance.
  28. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 8:25 pm
    markust: "...imaginary government takeover..."

    It`s not `imaginary` when it comes straight out of the communist manifesto. It`s not imaginary when governments, marching their way toward tyranny, disarm the public to enforce it`s will upon the governed.

    Our founders knew this basic simple fact about freedom, disarming the public leads to tyranny. Not rarely, not sometimes, not most of the time, but ALL THE TIME.
  29. Profile photo of whipplefunk
    whipplefunk Male 30-39
    1044 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 9:22 pm
    Lets be more smug, bill.
  30. Profile photo of aroc91
    aroc91 Male 18-29
    182 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 9:34 pm
    @HolyGod

    1. He was caught by surprise.
    2. You`re ignoring the many other thousands of documented cases of successful self defense.
  31. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 10:05 pm
    "It`s not `imaginary` when it comes straight out of the communist manifesto. It`s not imaginary when governments, marching their way toward tyranny, disarm the public to enforce it`s will upon the governed. Our founders knew this basic simple fact about freedom, disarming the public leads to tyranny. Not rarely, not sometimes, not most of the time, but ALL THE TIME."

    Please tell me you are just trolling.
  32. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 10:06 pm
    CrakrJak

    "disarming the public leads to tyranny. Not rarely, not sometimes, not most of the time, but ALL THE TIME."

    So in your mind England is on the precipice of tyranny? How about the dozens of other modern countries with little to no gun ownership?
  33. Profile photo of Gauddith
    Gauddith Female 18-29
    231 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 10:14 pm
    Ignoring the debate raging below, this actually made me smile. He was trying not to tear up at the end and you could tell how passionate he was about his cause. The little punch at the end sold it. This guy is an awesome passionate father, and I want to hug him.
  34. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 10:59 pm
    Thank you gauddith.

    The whole reason I posted it.
  35. Profile photo of Solvent
    Solvent Male 18-29
    2842 posts
    February 5, 2013 at 11:47 pm
    drat yeah.
  36. Profile photo of charlatan75
    charlatan75 Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 1:37 am
    I cannot fathom his ignorance. His daughter could have been murdered that day because someone found it just all sooo easy-peasy to lay his hands on a gun that day, and get into his daughter`s school on that day, yet he still supports wide, and free, and easily accessible gun ownership?

    That, is just stupid. Or ignorant, or blind, or he`s in denial as he loves his shiny penis extension too much to give it up. We took over ONE MILLION guns of Australian streets in 1996 and 2003 after the dreadful Port Arthur massacre, and massively tightened gun control laws. 600,000 illegal sporting rifles & 500,000 hand pistols, all compensated. No-one cried "My Constitutional Rights!" so our little children do not need to think about thinks such as gun massacres as they get their education. Australian children do not need to seek counselling or attend sad funerals of murdered friends after these common events.

    It is easier to get hold of a gun in America than it is in
  37. Profile photo of charlatan75
    charlatan75 Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 1:38 am
    Kazakhstan or Russia.
  38. Profile photo of crackyhoss
    crackyhoss Male 18-29
    254 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 1:39 am
    A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, what the drat is the third word of the 2nd amendment? REG-U-LA-TED... that means drating background checks and gun registries. You stupid drating redneck conspiracy theorists can`t be bothered to read the entire amendment, much less understand the context of the times for when it was written. Nobody is trying to take your guns, or your jerbs.
  39. Profile photo of Vexys
    Vexys Male 18-29
    74 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 3:09 am
    Charlatan its honestly not worth it, sad that its the case but not worth it, like banging your head against a wall.
  40. Profile photo of gary8162
    gary8162 Male 40-49
    939 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 4:10 am
    @ Charlatan
    It`s funny how you post what happened in Australia with your blinders on. You make no mention of your crime rate that`s gone up since taking away the guns . . . violent crime especially. Talk about stupid or ignorant.
    The man in this video clip may seem extreme in his views to a lot of people out there (not to me, but to others) but he hits the nail on the head with at least one thing. This country`s favorite way to push through laws is via the "knee jerk reaction" to a tragic public event. That is never a good idea. Just like screwing with our "Bill of Rights" is never a good idea.
  41. Profile photo of abrxax
    abrxax Male 18-29
    74 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:19 am
    The Police do NOT have a legal requirement to protect you. That`s why in every active shooter event they are hiding behind trees, cars and whatever else they can find. They wait until the shooting has stopped and then go in. They have a joke in Washington D.C. Why did MPD install gunshot detectors in the worst neighborhoods...So they know when its safe for them to show up. With all the budget cuts going on, Law enforcement cuts, its up to the INDIVIDUAL to be responsible for their own safety and security. In short, the police are not there to protect you. They are there to enforce laws. nothing more.
  42. Profile photo of abrxax
    abrxax Male 18-29
    74 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:38 am
    @ DromEd, Big thumbs up!!
    @ fancythat, the cheapest model of full auto weapon is a M-10 also know as a MAC-10. costs about $3,500 Plus a $200 tax stamp. You also have to get your CLEO (Chief Law Enforcement Officer) to sign the paperwork. Good luck on that. No one will go through all that to rob a house. They will get a $100 handgun to do it.
    Gun haters. Please do you homework and really, really think hard about the matter at hand. Use logic and reason, remove your emotions and just think.

    Example 1
    Example 2
    Example 3
    And your paperwork
  43. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:50 am
    "endowed by our Creator..."
    I really hate this poo. Some invisible man didn`t grant you rights, because if He did endow them to you, you probably would have received them long before the 1800s.

    He`s also wrong about how the constitution is amended; the courts don`t amend the constitution, that`s up to the LEGISLATORS in the house/senate and the states. So I don`t see how you need to go to the courts to take rights away, because you don`t.
  44. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:53 am
    Our allegiance is to the PEOPLE, not the government. We are citizens too. If the government is encroaching upon the rights of the people, then WE are being targeted too. A majority of the military would join any revolt made by the people, not just because the obligation we swore to is to the people, but because WE ARE THE PEOPLE... Just as much as anyone else is.
    So let me get this straight...You`re worried that the government will turn on its people and attempt to enslave you or whatever, but then you say that the only means the government would have to effectively police the entire nation wouldn`t do it anyway? What the hell are you worried about then?
  45. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:57 am
    The gun issue is no different.

    Oh yeah that`s right I forgot you have that smoking amendment in your constitution. Durrr.

    Our founders knew this basic simple fact about freedom, disarming the public leads to tyranny. Not rarely, not sometimes, not most of the time, but ALL THE TIME.
    And that`s why Australia and Japan are both communist dictatorships, right? There`s so much stupid in this thread I feel dumber for having read it.
  46. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7738 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 5:59 am
    These "God Laws" were put into place when it took 5 minutes to load a musket with one ball but the Not-Rights of today have twisted that to cover their modern day uzi`s.
  47. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:16 am
    @drawman61

    So would freedom of press only apply to printing presses and parchment? Get back to bowing to the crown this is none of your concern.
  48. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:27 am
    The Department of homeland security in about the last 9 months or so has bought over 1.4 billion rounds of ammo. A large portion of these .40 cal hollow point which don`t even follow the Geneva convention now why might that be? These numbers include the Social Security Administration and the National Weather Service but ya hand your guns over people you`re not to be trusted with them.....
  49. Profile photo of RobSwindol
    RobSwindol Male 30-39
    2514 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:30 am
    I wouldn`t call this an "own" at all. All he really does in this video is prove how little he actually knows about how laws and ammendment actually work.
  50. Profile photo of patchouly
    patchouly Male 40-49
    4746 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:35 am
    What a twit. These right wing nut bars are just as loony and their tree hugging, hippy counterparts. What this world needs is less crazy extremists and more, central thinking normal folks.
  51. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:36 am
  52. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    596 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:42 am
    <<<He`s also wrong about how the constitution is amended; the courts don`t amend the constitution, that`s up to the LEGISLATORS in the house/senate and the states. So I don`t see how you need to go to the courts to take rights away, because you don`t.<<<

    I must have missed this. I heard him say that there is a process by which the constitution is amended and a process by which rights are removed, I did not hear him indicate that they were the same processes.

    If you want to prohibit an activity, or for that matter require an activity, you should demonstrate how that prohibition, or requirement, will solve or prevent the problem you are seeking to address. So far I have yet to see this from the gun control advocates. Even the VP stated that the regulations proposed would do NOTHING to prevent another Sandy Hook type event.
  53. Profile photo of gary8162
    gary8162 Male 40-49
    939 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:44 am
    What this world needs is less crazy extremists and more, central thinking normal folks.
    This is actually one of the truest statements, not just on this thread but in general.
  54. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:59 am
    I must have missed this. I heard him say that there is a process by which the constitution is amended and a process by which rights are removed, I did not hear him indicate that they were the same processes.

    He said "In order to limit the rights of individuals there is something called `due process` and legislation is not due process. If you wanna take my rights away, let`s go to court."
  55. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    596 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:03 am
    >>> REG- U- LA- TED...<<<

    I believe the word in this case refers to discipline and practice.
    The 2nd amendment does not start with, As long as.... Nor does it state that the militia shall have the right to keep and bear arms, if this is what was meant the authors who were not exactly dumb people would have said so. Instead they used clear language to state exactly what they meant. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. To answer the question why the starting clause is included.
    We can argue about whether or not the rationale behind the 2nd still holds true, I actually lean toward the idea that it does not, and what other requirements there should be. But to put any of that in practice the 2nd amendment needs to be amended. There is a clear process for doing so, and it is not a knee jerk reaction by politicians.
  56. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    596 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:05 am
    >>>He said "In order to limit the rights of individuals there is something called `due process` and legislation is not due process. If you wanna take my rights away, let`s go to court."
    <<

    Yes exactly, the process for removing a persons rights. For example incarceration. NOT the process for eliminating a right to the population. But again perhaps my mind is parsing his words in a manner he did not mean.
  57. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:19 am

  58. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:21 am
    Funny how control freaks skip right over the part that says - "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
  59. Profile photo of SpermNinja81
    SpermNinja81 Male 30-39
    459 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:22 am
    I`m over this argument, but I`ve just got to ask exactly where people are getting their facts and figures regarding the crime rates in Australia post 1996? in just 20 minutes of searching I have found literally dozens of independent articles (I don`t feel the need to post each link, we can all google right?)that seem to reinforce the Australian Institute of Criminology`s reports on violent crime statistics that show that out of the five major types of violent crime (Assault,Robbery,Sexual Assault,Kidnap,Homicide) the only crime that continues to rise significantly is assault (which is quite clearly linked to the binge drinking epidemic here,but has no relevance to criminal use of firearms). Both sides of this argument have an agenda, and are capable of twisting information to meet it, but it would seem to me, that one could confidently argue that the firearms restrictions and buyback scheme in Australia after Port Arthur DID in fact reduce firearm deaths and suicides.
  60. Profile photo of SpermNinja81
    SpermNinja81 Male 30-39
    459 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:27 am
    That said, I DON`T think the same scheme will work in the US, there`s just too many firearms for the government to feasibly buyback at once, and it seems far too many owners willing to surrender them.
  61. Profile photo of SpermNinja81
    SpermNinja81 Male 30-39
    459 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:33 am
    I think that the US`s position in relation to firearm ownership is one that is totally unique in historical terms, and can`t be compared to Australia or the UK and especially not Nazi Germany. If you do look at some of the rates of firearm deaths in Australia in the last two decades and compare it to the US I`m pretty sure most would agree that at least In Australia, more guns would equal more innocent deaths.
  62. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:40 am
    @spermninja: You`re right, assault was on an upward trend even before the gun ban.


    *This chart is from page 6 of the 2011 Australian Crime Statistics Report.
  63. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 7:53 am
    What I see from the chart below is no impact whatsoever from the ban. Much like what our firt "assault weapon" ban did. People like to not notice the school shootings that took place under the ban.
  64. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
    People like to not notice the school shootings that took place under the ban.
    Since the Australia gun ban, iirc there have been no mass shootings (4+ killed) in Australia.
  65. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
    "The Department of homeland security in about the last 9 months or so has bought over 1.4 billion rounds of ammo. A large portion of these .40 cal hollow point which don`t even follow the Geneva convention now why might that be? These numbers include the Social Security Administration and the National Weather Service but ya hand your guns over people you`re not to be trusted with them....."

    Do you believe every chain mail you read. The 5 year contract is for 450 Million rounds. They haven`t bought 1.9 Billion rounds. And you conveniently left out Border Protection, Secret Service, Immigration Enforcement. They`re buying in bulk to save money. Factcheck
  66. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:21 am
    I just noticed the fact check I linked to was from March of 2012. So it doesn`t relate to the last 9 months like you are talking about but since you misled people by leaving out significant departments that need ammunition I`m sure it still does relate. Plus the fact check explains that it is a 5 year plan.
  67. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:21 am
    McGovern1981

    "So would freedom of press only apply to printing presses and parchment?"

    Well, technology has made the spread of information easier and faster and more ubiquitous. That is good thing.

    Technology has also made the spread of bullets easier and faster and more ubiquitous. That is bad thing.

    Do you get the difference between good and bad?

    Since, apparently, you like to pretend the bill of rights are SO important to you, why aren`t you up in arms over the 7th amendment? My guess is because you don`t even know what it is. But guess what? We don`t follow it anymore because times changed and it isn`t 1791 anymore.
  68. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:23 am
    @patchgrabber

    Talking the US ban.
  69. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:26 am
    Ha ha. I found where you are getting your "facts". You read Modern Survival Blogs. Your credibility just fell through the toilet with me.
  70. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:27 am
    @markust123

    So border patrol needs 450 million hollow point nothing fishy about the Social Security Administration and the National Weather Service need those along with .308 hollow points must have to snipe that blizzard coming along.
  71. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:30 am
    @markust123

    450 million .40-caliber bullets billions of bullets total not for any military branch what so ever. Maths not a strong point with you is it?
  72. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:31 am
    "So border patrol needs 450 million hollow point nothing fishy about the Social Security Administration and the National Weather Service need those along with .308 hollow points must have to snipe that blizzard coming along."

    Nothing fishy when you stretch that over a five year plan.
  73. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:31 am
    the way I see it, I need a gun.Those around me with guns are rednecks.Bad people to have guns...they want to shoot UFO`s and bigfoot.
  74. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:34 am
    Since it is obvious you didn`t even bother reading the fact check here,

    "Homeland Security oversees more than 135,000 weapons-carrying officers. If those officers go through all the possible 450 million rounds at the same rate each over five years -- admittedly, an unlikely balance -- each officer will have used about 667 bullets a year."
  75. Profile photo of antagonizer
    antagonizer Male 18-29
    508 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:35 am
    Well said.
  76. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:36 am
    @HolyGod

    $20 here ya go!

    Well, technology has made the spread of information easier and faster and more ubiquitous. That is good thing.

    Ya not like you can find out how to make a fertilizer bomb or all sorts of gasses and weapons online......

  77. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:40 am
    @markust123

    Hollow points aren`t for target pratice if you use 667 rounds a year you`ve been killing some people.
  78. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:44 am
    @Zeegrr60

  79. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:46 am
    "Hollow points aren`t for target pratice if you use 667 rounds a year you`ve been killing some people."

    Why read facts when conspiracy theories are so much more fun. From the fact check, "On its website, the Georgia-based center says it trains law officers for 90 federal agencies and also officers in state, local, tribal, and international law enforcement. Chandler said that in the 12 months through September 2011, over 11,000 students at the center fired over 11 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition, primarily in basic training."
  80. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:58 am
    @markust123

    Now I don`t see hollow points said to being shot there. That`s cause they cost more you target practice with soft point or FMJ doing it with hollow points would be pointless and a waste of money. So that would mean either the trainers have no idea what they`re doin or are full of s**t pick one.
  81. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 9:03 am
    "Now I don`t see hollow points said to being shot there."

    What? You specifically mentioned .40 caliber rounds in your initial comment. The quote is specifically talking about .40 caliber rounds being fired in training? Training is not just target practice. Targets don`t move. Maybe during training they want to keep the realism of what they will fire in the field. I don`t know.
  82. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 9:05 am
    As much fun as this dive into the mind of a survivalist was I have to make my 40 foot commute to work. I`m 5 minutes late.
  83. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6158 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 9:17 am
    HolyGod-"Do you get the difference between good and bad?"

    So the Bill of Rights can be limited to a time-period reference if they are perceived as `bad`, but not limited to a time-period reference if they are perceived as `good`.

    Are YOU to be the arbiter of what is `good` and what is `bad`?

    See, technology has also made the spread of lies and disinformation faster and more ubiquitous. This is a bad thing.

    Technology has also made the self-protection by fire-arms more readily available to people. This is a good thing.

    So, based on your own `logic`, you should be the first to give up your non-constitutional computer and send me a letter with your objections and arguments on parchment printed with a screw press. (and you cant send it via the United Postal Service, FedEx or any other such means that did not exist at the teim).
  84. Profile photo of charlatan75
    charlatan75 Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 9:56 am
    @ gary8162 You should really stop using Godfatherpolitics.com to word your arguments.

    Your own ABC has reported it more accurately and truthfully here http://abcnews.go.com /International/australia-model- successful-gun-control-laws/ story?id=18007055

    Only as fool cannot see through the propaganda of the pro-gun lobby on this, lies already denounced on numerous internet `hoax` websites such as Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/ crime/statistics/ausguns.asp)

    While your at it, check out these crazies running your country. http://www.motherjones.com/ politics/2013/01/ craziest-anti-obama-gun-reactions

    Thankfully, I will never have to live next to nutters who believe that if more people have access to guns, gun crimes will somehow become LESS likely.
  85. Profile photo of greenbasterd
    greenbasterd Male 18-29
    2377 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 10:37 am
    hey charlatan a quick google search on australian violent crimes makes everything you said the garbage it is.. you guys are very violent and shouldn`t have guns i agree. i`m glad that`s working out for you.. now stay the drat out of the rest of the worlds politics
  86. Profile photo of diylobotomy
    diylobotomy Male 18-29
    1832 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 11:24 am
    Stopped watching after he said "inanimate object" and talked about getting frisked at the senate. That`s really all that needs to be said.

    1. Guns are objects, they cannot kill people. 2. Why do our senators enjoy such high security while our children have a "gun free zone" sign to protect them?
  87. Profile photo of charlatan75
    charlatan75 Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 11:31 am
    Maybe look again, @greenbasterd. Try an official webpage like the one I took this data from, just one snap shot from 1991-2001. An official website may be better, say, the Australian Institute of Criminology? Or you can stick with your wonderfully accurate results that Google searches spit up without questioning the source.

    In 1996, a long upwards trend of firearm deaths peaked and then declined. This webpage has two very clear graphs showing the peak in 1996 and then the clear decline. This is one example only, using official data, which even you could find if you tried hard enough. I could find more.

    Good luck! I`m tired of going on any more; as an earlier poster said, it`s exactly like hitting my head against a brick wall.

    This Data
  88. Profile photo of charlatan75
    charlatan75 Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 11:43 am
    I could also mention the idiocy of a Canadian telling me to "stay the drat out of the rest of the worlds (sic) politics" when we`re discussing US gun control. But I won`t.
  89. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 12:08 pm
    MeGrendel

    "Technology has also made the self-protection by fire-arms more readily available to people. This is a good thing."

    You guys always throw that out. I own a handgun for personal / home protection. I am in no way against that. Nobody I know is against that.

    The issue of this video is about high capacity rounds, assault weapons, and registration. None of the things the president has proposed and this video argues against would in any way keep an individual from being able to protect themselves.

    This debate IS NOT about personal protection.

    This debate is about rednecks wanting to have full blown arsenals because they think they can fight the government if they need to which is so patently absurd it shouldn`t be allowed in the conversation.

    Because these people want to accrue massive amounts of military grade weaponry without the government noticing they fight any legislation that may help prevent mass shootings.
  90. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 12:13 pm
    "This debate is about rednecks wanting to have full blown arsenals because they think they can fight the government if they need to which is so patently absurd it shouldn`t be allowed in the conversation."

    Nailed it.
  91. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 12:39 pm
    Because these people want to accrue massive amounts of military grade weaponry without the government noticing they fight any legislation that may help prevent mass shootings.

    Ya cause an AR-15 isn`t used in competitive shooting ever. Hanguns kill more peopl than "assualt weapons" would that mean they should also be classifed as one.
  92. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:14 pm
    McGovern1981

    "Ya cause an AR-15 isn`t used in competitive shooting ever."

    If someone would like to buy and own an AR 15 or even an AK-47 or anything else they should be allowed to buy it, own it, and use it as long as it never leaves the registered shooting facility where it is kept. Like safety deposit boxes at the bank. I think that is perfectly reasonable.
  93. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:19 pm
    McGovern1981

    "Hanguns kill more peopl than "assualt weapons""

    You are absolutely right. Hand guns kill more people. However I will repeat this for the 300th time. MOST gun murders are one person intentionally killing another specific person. Those crimes are virtually unpreventable and do not in any way affect or concern me or my family. This is not about MOST gun crime. This is about trying to lessen mass shootings and innocent bystanders.

    If ONE guy trying to get an AR-15 to shoot up a school can`t because of a new gun law then it is worth all of you feeling like your rights are being infringed. Hell, even if it takes him an extra week to find one it is worth it. That is one more week his victims had to spend with their families.

    You guys always act like we can`t stop these shootings no matter what, so we shouldn`t even try. Lessening them would be a good step.
  94. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:24 pm
    think they can fight the government if they need to which is so patently absurd it

    Nevermind the Chechnyans took on their own govt, moving along.
  95. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:32 pm
    Cajun247

    "Nevermind the Chechnyans took on their own govt, moving along."

    You are talking about an area with its own government and army that views itself as an independent state under the rule of another country that has been warring and fighting for freedom for centuries.

    This is not Russia.
  96. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:36 pm
    You guys always act like we can`t stop these shootings no matter what, so we shouldn`t even try.

    We are very certain it is an unreachable goal, there`s no feasible way to measure how the damage has been "lessened" either. Fortunately, incidents like these aren`t becoming more frequent. School manages to be the safest place for a child any time of day, the Sandy Hook children were ultimately unlucky.
  97. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:38 pm
    This is not Russia.

    Yes, but the point was an armed populace CAN serve as a meaningful check against a state that does have modern well-equipped professional army.
  98. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6728 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:42 pm
    Cajun247

    "Yes, but the point was an armed populace CAN serve as a meaningful check against a state that does have modern well-equipped professional army."

    No. I don`t think you made that point. The Checens fighting were not random gun owning citizens. Russia has much stricter gun laws than the US does. The Chechens fighting were members of the Chechen army. You know, that whole "well regulated militia" thing....
  99. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 2:56 pm
    The Chechens fighting were members of the Chechen army. You know, that whole "well regulated militia" thing....

    Chechnya did not have any recognized standing army at the time. In fact their efforts were complemented by the Mujahideen. Hardly what anyone would call "a well regulated militia".

    "ore than 40,000 soldiers from the (p.1141)Russian army ... have quickly been humbled by a few thousand urban guerrillas who mostly live at home, wear jeans, use castoff weapons and have almost no coherent battle plans or organization."
    -Michael Spector, `For Russia`s troops`, NY Times
  100. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 3:00 pm
    You know, that whole "well regulated militia" thing....

    Blissfully ignore the whole THE PEOPLE line.
  101. Profile photo of Runemang
    Runemang Male 30-39
    2676 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 3:45 pm
    He lost me when he said that "right to bear arms" makes even a background check unconstitutional. Bull. F`ing. S**t.

    Jesus, did not one single gun advocate ever take a history class or read the constitution or look at the context of the people and time when it was written? It`s a shame we can`t put the original Constitutional Congress in the same room with this guy and watch how fast they clarify what they meant ...

  102. Profile photo of SpermNinja81
    SpermNinja81 Male 30-39
    459 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 6:36 pm
    Again with the rogue government fantasy?. I ask again.. exactly who do you think you`ll be fighting if your `gummerment` decides to turn on it`s own people? zombies? robots? as @taylor stone already pointed out the US military is made up of US citizens, and I think it`s highly unlikely that even the most gung-ho marine would willingly turn a rifle on his own friends and neighbors. Unfortunately, @taylor stone then went on a rant about history`s oppressive governments. as much as you`d like to disagree, the US is not a facist state run by it`s military (Nazi Germany), It`s not a single-party socialist state(Communist Russia,Nth Korea) It is a modern western democracy, with checks and balances. It`s not perfect, but there`s an ocean of `what-if`s to be crossed before Times square becomes Tienanmen square. It`s a fantasy that tries to justify owning military-style weapons, and it`s not at all relevant to the issue at hand; The prevention of mass shootings.
  103. Profile photo of Nerd_Rage
    Nerd_Rage Male 18-29
    425 posts
    February 6, 2013 at 8:12 pm
    @spermninja

    Most nazis say they were just following orders.
  104. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6158 posts
    February 7, 2013 at 7:57 am
    HolyGod-"I think that is perfectly reasonable.

    Luckily, you are in the minority. What you think is irrelevent. It has not basis on other`s rights.

Leave a Reply