Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Sounds like she's parroting Mayor Bloomberg and the Brady people.
1 posted on 10/07/2009 2:04:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet

All they have to do is sneak in a provision declaring gun control by the feds in some innocuous bill such like they’re doing with health care ... guns gone ....


2 posted on 10/07/2009 2:07:18 PM PDT by SkyDancer ('Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not..' ~ Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

GUNS RULE..................details at 11............


3 posted on 10/07/2009 2:07:43 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Pray for, and support our troops(heroes) !! And vote out the RINO's!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

It’d be a waste of one of my Hornady Hydrashocks...

Colonel, USAFR


4 posted on 10/07/2009 2:08:03 PM PDT by jagusafr (Kill the red lizard, Lord! - nod to C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
More far-reaching and frightening is the Supreme Court’s decision to take up a case challenging the city’s ban on handgun ownership

Frightening indeed. I'm more frightened by the liberal mind set that comes up with this drivel than I could ever be of armed law abiding citizens.

5 posted on 10/07/2009 2:08:19 PM PDT by Graybeard58 ( Selah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I wonder what Marie Cocco would know about guns.


6 posted on 10/07/2009 2:08:41 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (America! We're spending our grandchildren's inheritance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The metrosexuals have nothing to fear from armed citizens......

......and the criminals will carry regardless.

7 posted on 10/07/2009 2:09:10 PM PDT by BenLurkin (Brave amateurs....they do their part.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Owners of rifles used in hunting, for example, are unaffected by the local law.

...as are violent criminals.

Get a clue. In fact, get two. They're small.

8 posted on 10/07/2009 2:09:43 PM PDT by TChris (There is no freedom without the possibility of failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
More far-reaching and frightening is the Supreme Court’s decision to take up a case challenging the city’s ban on handgun ownership in the court’s new term, which begins this week.

Because the ban on handgun ownership has been so successful at thwarting violent crime.

9 posted on 10/07/2009 2:14:10 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Ask not what the Kennedys can do for you, but what you can do for the Kennedys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Only about a decade ago, gun rights activists often claimed that they wanted their weapons in order to hunt.

That was never claimed by us "gun lobbyists". We all simply defended the practicality of semi-autos for hunting when the liberal "panty-waist" lobby told us we did not need them because they weren't of any use for hunting.

We only fought the battle using the terms they defined (probably a mistake in itself). But the basic argument never changed, it has only taken a decade to get the terms of the argument defined as they should be.

10 posted on 10/07/2009 2:14:43 PM PDT by PsyOp (Put government in charge of tire pressure, and we'll soon have a shortage of air. - PsyOp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Ms. Marie Cocco can write at length of her opposition to RKBA without mentioning the second amendment. It's a unique ability of the Left to ignore facts.
11 posted on 10/07/2009 2:14:51 PM PDT by Jacquerie (An elective despotism was not the government we fought for - James Madison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

My crystal ball tells me the ruling will go something like this: The state/city cannot put a total ban on handguns in the home, but other restrictions, well they might be OK...leaving...no, kicking the door wide open for restrictions on the types of handguns or other guns, limits on types of ammunition and how much you can have, limits on actually carrying arms, licensing, etc. Everything but a “complete ban on handguns”.


12 posted on 10/07/2009 2:15:57 PM PDT by SandWMan ( I'm still trying to find the section in the Constitution that mentions "nation building".......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Liberals are always out there fighting for various rights, except this one. Strange.


13 posted on 10/07/2009 2:17:32 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Hurl, you will...

14 posted on 10/07/2009 2:18:32 PM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
A predictable, laughable, liberal's screed. Idiots like this need to be directly confronted with questions like, "How is it common sense when all data definitively illustrate the exact opposite of what you claim?" or "Isn't true that what you call "common sense" is really just your opinion based on your personal fear of firearms and not on any factual data or information at all?"

Then sit back a watch the sputtering and stuttering and personal outrage...all of which proves you right and them to be asses.
15 posted on 10/07/2009 2:19:39 PM PDT by Sudetenland (Slow to anger but terrible in vengence...such is the character of the American people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
It will usher in a scary season of assault on the common sense of citizens, law enforcement officials and others who believe that carrying today’s high-powered weapons in an urbanized, mobile—and angry—society is chillingly dangerous, and deadly.

Actually, today's chillingly dangerous, angry urbanized society is the reason that I own high-powered weapons.

16 posted on 10/07/2009 2:20:02 PM PDT by Charles Martel (NRA Lifetime Member since 1984; TSRA rookie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Can you conceal carry a 2x4?


18 posted on 10/07/2009 2:22:37 PM PDT by Overtaxed Patriot (Lock and load)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The lawlessness and tremendous rise in gun murders in the streets of DC after the previous Court Decision makes the prospect of extending the protection of the Court to the 2nd Amd in Chicago truly frightening. Chicago will be depopulated as the gun war of all against all consumes the City and daily sweeps must begin to collect the bodies from the sidewalks. Ms. Brady told me so and no one is wiser than Ms. Brady, except perhaps Ms. Sotomasomethingorother.


20 posted on 10/07/2009 2:23:12 PM PDT by arthurus ("If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, don't shoot an abortionist." -Ann C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." - Robert A. Heinlein

We're just doing our part to restore civility to our society.

21 posted on 10/07/2009 2:26:59 PM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The gun lobby’s potency already has led Congress to abandon the 1990s-era ban on semiautomatic assault weapons, a prohibition that was broadly supported by law enforcement officials.

Actually it was law enforcement politicians which is what most police chiefs and county sherrifs are. As politicians they are MOSTLY risk averse and seek only the preservation of their political life.

25 posted on 10/07/2009 2:37:28 PM PDT by AreaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Owners of rifles used in hunting, for example, are unaffected by the local law.”

The editors at The Washington Post write this as kinda proof that Chicago recognizes some aspect of the Second Amendment.

News flash to those people: The Second Amendment never was about hunting.


27 posted on 10/07/2009 2:40:58 PM PDT by OldPossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson