we could start with on the spot summary executions of every thug/gangbanger caught with a gun... but that's just me
Posted on 02/09/2014 9:50:58 AM PST by rktman
I agree. I've said many times that commission of a violent crime, B&E, felony theft, etc. while in possession of a firearm out to bring attempted murder charges as the gun is there with the forethought of dealing death.
You want to reduce the amount of gun crime (actually all crime)? Order prosecutors to not plea bargain with chronic violent criminals, and do their utmost to put them in jail for as long as possible.
Eliminate all socialists. Especially the National socialist and more extreme communists. We won't need the guns except for target practice. That's fun...
we could start with on the spot summary executions of every thug/gangbanger caught with a gun... but that's just me
It seems reasonable to investigate everyone who buys a gun and exercises their constitutional rights. It’s for the children. It seems reasonable to register all guns and gun owner so we know who has guns and where they are. It’s for the children. It seems reasonable that people only need 7 clips in a magazine. it’s for the children. It seems reasonable And it seems reasonable that guns should be stored at a gun range or at the local police station. It’s for the children. It seems reasonable to ban all gun ownership. It’s for the children.
What is unreasonable are public libraries. Does anyone really NEED 100,000 books in one place? Does anyone really NEED 50 different newspapers from all over the world? Does anyone really need books written by subversive authors who criticize our light-worker, kind of a god, lord and savior, messiah, president? No one needs all those books.
Just so.
I guess what they mean is that their "suggestions" are "sensible" and "reasonable" for leftists who want all firearms band.
And with what we've seen since Barky was a candidate for the demoncrat nomination, if a leftist says ANYTHING, they mean exactly the opposite!
Mark
It’s nothing but class warfare. Latte-sipping granola-crunching reed-thin pro-gay urban liberal atheists versus gun toting hetero redneck bitter clingers with their Bibles & their BBQ. Proud to be one of the latter, BTW.
No communication possible, only victory counts.
Watch out for their latest tactic: liberals who claim they own guns AND support the right to do so.
Yeah. Diane Feinstein is a liberal gun owner, so is Jay Rockefeller & Barack Obama is a skeet shooter & Wendy Davis supports open carry. Yeah, right. The original “guns for me but not for thee” crowd.
Agreed, I failed to include that most-overused canard, “common sense.” Especially worthy of inclusion due to their musings being so bereft of any “common sense.” There’s been more common sense in the 28 comments before this than in all the published crapola from the various gun control organizations over the years. I especially liked the observation that if someone is too dangerous to own a firearm then they are too dangerous to walk among the rest of us.
More “reasonable” gun control.
Marx and Lenin would be SOOOOOOOOOO PROUD.
It will never happen. The last thing that the leftists and ruling class wants is a reduction in crime against the lower and middle classes. First off, it's too dangerous for law enforcement to really go after armed criminals. Secondly, any real reduction in armed crime will result in a call to reduce the militarization of civilian police, and that goes against the grain of statists. Finally, a reduction in armed crime might result in more people deciding they don't want to be completely dependent on the government.
A perfect example is Chicago. If Rahm and his cronies really wanted to stop the genocide of young Black children, he could. Instead, he implores on bended knee that the gang-bangers stay away "the chilrun" as they kill each other. "We've got two gangbangers, one standing next to a kid. Get away from that kid. Take your stuff away to the alley. Don't touch the children of the city of Chicago. Don't get near them" He's making an appeal to the "values" and good will of the gang-bangers. "I don't buy this case where people say they don't have values. They do have values. They have the wrong values." Like Luke Skywalker, who can sense some goodness in Darth Vader Rahm can sense some good in the Gang Bangers.
Mark
100%! it's just wishful thinking on my part...
I prefer the term "counter-revolutionary".
These are people who wish to continue fighting the Revolutionary War which began over 200 years ago.
The Soviets knew what to do with such people. So, too, the Chinese. Perhaps we should consider the damage being done by them and examine our attitudes toward people who would use the power of the federal and state governments to infringe our right to keep and bear arms.
We could start with "re-education" camps. Anti-gunners would thank us for helping them understand the damage they are doing. It is we, who are faithful to the Revolution, who would judge whether anyone being re-educated is worthy to re-enter society. Sounds like fun to me.
And to think, in 1962 Thomas J Dodd and Emanuel Cellar proposed the first federal law on common firearms.
1962; “We don’t want to take away your guns, we ONLY want to register handguns! Rifles and shotguns will not be affected”.
1964: “We only want to register all your guns, not ban them! Only Army surplus guns will be banned.”
1968: “We only want to register your guns, and ban “Saturday Night Specials” and small foreign handguns along with army surplus rifles!” (They got the ban on 5 shot army surplus rifles and handguns and small foreign pistols)
1970: “We only want to ban Saturday night specials! Large handguns and rifles will not be affected!”
1976: “We only want to ban all handguns! Long guns will not be affected!”
1981: “The NRA is a rifle organization! They should give up their handguns, and they can keep their rifles!”- Lee Grant on GMA
1984: “We must ban “assault Rifles, unsuitable or hunting!”
1989: George Bush bans import of some foreign made “assault rifles”.
1992: Assault rifle ban passed by Clinton.
2000: first calls to ban single shot .50 cal rifles...
2012 calls for MORE bans on semi auto rifles and handguns.
And so it continues.
They lied to us in 1962.
They lied to us in 1964.
They lied to us in 1968.
They lied to us in 1970.
They lied to us in 1976.
They lied to us in 1981.
They lied to us in 2013,
AND THEY ARE LYING TO US NOW!
You make the pertinent point. Everything the left had achieved prior to Hussein had been through incrementalism. Now that they have Hussein in the White House, they think they have a bullet-proof comeback for anyone who protests their sudden leaps in advancing tyranny as opposed to their former incrementalism-just call them a rayciss.
????
I put on my liberal reporter hat for a moment.
If, after 22,000 gun laws on the books, one still has to ask this question, then it’s time to find another cause. And time to wipe those laws off the books, since gun control has been outed as people control.
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.