Posted on 12/20/2012 7:13:29 PM PST by chessplayer
The day after a gun control advocate told CNN that America's gun problem includes handgun shootings, Starting Point anchor Soledad O'Brien began asking Democratic politicians if they would consider legislating handguns.
"Well, is going to the assault weapons far enough?" O'Brien asked Democratic Rep. Ron Barber (Ariz.) on Tuesday. "I think it's 80 percent is handguns involved in gun violence. Does this, do you think open up a conversation toward limiting handguns?"
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN: There are some people who would say by focusing on the assault weapons, a ban on assault weapons at the end of the day removes 2 to maybe 8 percent of the violence. That the bulk of the violence is actually handguns, and to not take a look at handguns really leaves a massive portion of where the actual violence is taking place, sort of unchallenged. Would you agree with that? And what would you do about that?
Sen. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-Conn.): I do agree that handguns are a threat on the streets of big cities like Bridgeport, Hartford, New York, killing children. And the President is right to focus on our children who are the victims of this horrific massacre last Friday, but also day by day, the drive-by shootings in many of these big cities. And so better tracing, better kinds of apprehension of stolen handguns, often the source of violence in our big cities, and law enforcement will tell you, and I've worked with them for 20 years as the state's attorney general, before that as a federal prosecutor in Connecticut, that the proliferation of handguns is a major threat to them as well as to our children.
Maybe if you had used one to reduce the criminal population a bit; you would not be so spineless now.
Oh wait, these are leftists, how could I be that silly.
When were these idiots taught to begin questions with “There are some who say”?
Blumenthal is a far-left ideologue and not to be trusted at all.
Everything he suggested as solutions to gun crimes are already in effect, and often ineffective, not enforced, poorly written laws that get overturned by the courts, and are aimed at disarming the potential victims/victims on an equal basis with the criminal.
That is why they always fail.
It has always been about handguns. Assault rifles was just a decoy to try and get their anti-gun foot in the door.
Once they get a ban on AWs then they will use the same reasons to go after handguns.
John Kennedy killed with a 5 shot bolt action rifle.
Bobby Kennedy with a .22 Iver Johnson Cadet revolver.
George Wallace wounded with a 5 shot Charter Arms .38spl.
Gerald Ford attacked with a 7 shot 1911 semi auto.
Edmond OK post office with two National Guard 7 shot 1911 pistols.
Ronald Reagan and Jim Brady with an RG-14 .22 pistol.
What do they all have in common? NONE over 7 rounds, yet after each one came a cry of panic to ban them.
Useful idiot.
Where handguns are unlawful already.
They can pass all the laws they like. What they can't do is make people obey them.
/johnny
Journalism school. Or watching a news show ever.
Maybe they’re just born knowing that’s the easiest way to say what you think without explicitly saying it’s what you think.
By the way, did anyone anytime bring up the little footnote about us having a right to have at least some kind of gun in some fashion? No? Okay.
What Nelson P Shields, founder of Handgun Control Inc said...
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years.
The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
“Yes, I’m for an outright ban [on handguns].”
-Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., 60 Minutes interview
Back to HK91.com Quote Library
Back to HK91.com Homepage
What about shotguns? They shoot many pellets all at once, that’s kinda like a machine gun!!!!
I really don’t give a rat’s patoooti what a lying Sac’oshiite lib has to say about much of anything.
Especially THIS Blumenthal lying SOB.
Oh Soledad, you pretty little idiot.
And he'd better not allow people with guns around to protect them, either, right? In fact, he should even get rid of this own armed guards. What's good for the kids must be good for the president.
The blood of Sandy Hook is on Soledad and all those who seek to criminalize self defense. Shame on them!
if she or anyone she knew was attacked she’d be wishing she was armed.
it’s code for “i think”
“Yes, I’m for an outright ban [on handguns].”
-Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., 60 Minutes interview
Shields-”Except for myself and other liberal elitists like Michael Moore and Feinstein, of course.”
Don't kid yourselves . . . These people never let up or give up.
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.