Aa
NRA Fires Back at President Obama
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/nra-goes-offensive-over-high-capacity-magazine-ban-162148044--politics.html
The same week President Barack Obama used his State of the Union to warn Congress that the victims of gun violence "deserve a vote" on gun legislation, the National Rifle Association has gone on the offensive against attempts to ban high-capacity magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The NRA, the nation's largest gun rights lobby, released an ad on Thursday that suggested banning high-capacity magazines will turn the country into a crime-ridden nightmare where only the wealthy are protected from murderers and thieves.
The ad points out that Secret Service and other law enforcement officers will not be barred from using the high-capacity magazines, while criminals would still be able to purchase them on the black market. "It's just the rest of us, the law-abiding people, who will have to defend our families with limited-capacity magazines," a narrator intones. "Welcome to Barack Obama's middle class."
High-capacity magazines and some semi-automatic weapons were banned for 10 years under a law signed by President Bill Clinton. It expired in 2004.
Meanwhile, the NRA's vice president, Wayne LaPierre, wrote an op-ed in the Daily Caller on Thursday warning that gun owners must "stand and fight" against any attempts at gun control. “Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face—not just maybe. It's not paranoia to buy a gun. It's survival. It's responsible behavior, and it's time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that," he wrote.
Polls show a majority of Americans support banning high-capacity magazines, as well as closing loopholes that allow some gun buyers to evade federal background checks before purchasing a weapon. (The background checks screen out felons and people who have been declared mentally ill by a judge from purchasing weapons.)
The NRA has also taken a stand against the background checks.
"When it comes to the issue of background checks, let’s be honest—background checks will never be 'universal'—because criminals will never submit to them," LaPierre said at a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting last month.
A ban on certain semi-automatic weapons pushed by Obama and some Democrats in Congress enjoys less popular support than either the magazine ban or background checks.
The same week President Barack Obama used his State of the Union to warn Congress that the victims of gun violence "deserve a vote" on gun legislation, the National Rifle Association has gone on the offensive against attempts to ban high-capacity magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The NRA, the nation's largest gun rights lobby, released an ad on Thursday that suggested banning high-capacity magazines will turn the country into a crime-ridden nightmare where only the wealthy are protected from murderers and thieves.
The ad points out that Secret Service and other law enforcement officers will not be barred from using the high-capacity magazines, while criminals would still be able to purchase them on the black market. "It's just the rest of us, the law-abiding people, who will have to defend our families with limited-capacity magazines," a narrator intones. "Welcome to Barack Obama's middle class."
High-capacity magazines and some semi-automatic weapons were banned for 10 years under a law signed by President Bill Clinton. It expired in 2004.
Meanwhile, the NRA's vice president, Wayne LaPierre, wrote an op-ed in the Daily Caller on Thursday warning that gun owners must "stand and fight" against any attempts at gun control. “Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face—not just maybe. It's not paranoia to buy a gun. It's survival. It's responsible behavior, and it's time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that," he wrote.
Polls show a majority of Americans support banning high-capacity magazines, as well as closing loopholes that allow some gun buyers to evade federal background checks before purchasing a weapon. (The background checks screen out felons and people who have been declared mentally ill by a judge from purchasing weapons.)
The NRA has also taken a stand against the background checks.
"When it comes to the issue of background checks, let’s be honest—background checks will never be 'universal'—because criminals will never submit to them," LaPierre said at a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting last month.
A ban on certain semi-automatic weapons pushed by Obama and some Democrats in Congress enjoys less popular support than either the magazine ban or background checks.
I find it incredibly disturbing that people do not get this. Take Orleans Parish, take Chicago, take DC, or perhaps Detroit.... it is the amount of bad guys in any local area that are the problem. Laws are for the lawful to abide by and the bad guys to completely disregard.
That’s a good Link for State Laws but you have to remember this is just a minimum base for State Laws.
The Grey areas are Laws that are hidden in “State preemption of local restrictions”. In some States Local Laws are Grand Fathered in and a lot of Cities have additional Laws to the Basic State Laws.
Here’s an example, last December, The New Orleans City Council wanted to add additional Gun Laws. What people don’t know about New Orleans is, it is actually very small. Orleans Parish (County) is probably the smallest in the state. The reason is, the area is so compact; you can literally walk across a street and be in another Parish and Town. If your not from this area, you wouldn't know the differance.
That being said, as small as New Orleans is, it became #1 in Murder per Capita.
I said all of that to get to this, one man addressed the Council and asked, “ why is it, the surrounding Parishes have far more people and guns than Orleans Parish but yet New Orleans have had more Gun Violence than all of the surrounding Parishes combined? Could the problem be your Districts and not the Gun Laws? If they are not following existing Gun Laws, what evidence can you provide that adding additional Laws will make a difference?” The problem is your Districts, not the Gun Laws.
It was funny to see the stunned look on their faces.
The Grey areas are Laws that are hidden in “State preemption of local restrictions”. In some States Local Laws are Grand Fathered in and a lot of Cities have additional Laws to the Basic State Laws.
Here’s an example, last December, The New Orleans City Council wanted to add additional Gun Laws. What people don’t know about New Orleans is, it is actually very small. Orleans Parish (County) is probably the smallest in the state. The reason is, the area is so compact; you can literally walk across a street and be in another Parish and Town. If your not from this area, you wouldn't know the differance.
That being said, as small as New Orleans is, it became #1 in Murder per Capita.
I said all of that to get to this, one man addressed the Council and asked, “ why is it, the surrounding Parishes have far more people and guns than Orleans Parish but yet New Orleans have had more Gun Violence than all of the surrounding Parishes combined? Could the problem be your Districts and not the Gun Laws? If they are not following existing Gun Laws, what evidence can you provide that adding additional Laws will make a difference?” The problem is your Districts, not the Gun Laws.
It was funny to see the stunned look on their faces.
Actually, I went back it does mention open and concealed carry, but it will probably look a little grey because of the wording.
Those statistics are pretty close to accurate. I didn't read the entire piece on Wyoming, but I also didn't see that you don't need a permit to carry concealed.
Good reference though.
Good reference though.
Here is a link to the gun laws, restrictions, state by state. As you can see the laws in a lot of the states are very lax. I didnt compare them to the federal law which takes precedence over the state tho. So for anyone interested to find out what they are in your state, here is the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state
New Orleans is like Washington DC. Get a couple of Blocks off the Beaten Path and you will see how much of a Sh!t Hole it really is.
I'd say that a lot of the problem during Katrina had a lot to do with the amount of criminals in a place like New Orleans. That is the only place I've been to where I felt completely out of place and a target for crime. (New York City? Nope, folks liked the old cowboy hat.)
Lol..Obviously I was exaggerating..Their gun laws are fairly lenient compared to other states..
This is an old article but it shows what it was..
http://www.examiner.com/article/louisiana-gun-rights-control-laws-worst-the-nation
Here's what the people of New Orleans feel now..
http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/4335598-148/la-voters-set-to-strengthen
This is an old article but it shows what it was..
http://www.examiner.com/article/louisiana-gun-rights-control-laws-worst-the-nation
Here's what the people of New Orleans feel now..
http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/4335598-148/la-voters-set-to-strengthen
New Orleans has no gun laws? Wow... that's news to me. I'd better let my cop friends in NO to stop enforcing them then.
I have always meant to have a gun. My dad had one, my neighbors had them, it was never a big deal.
I don't think we should have assault weapons but I am more passionate about the background checks and tighter regulations as well stronger penalties for people owning guns unlawfully.
The thing is, the people who like their rhetoric already support them, if they want to garner support they need to do it more rationally and without trying to scare us.
I don't think we should have assault weapons but I am more passionate about the background checks and tighter regulations as well stronger penalties for people owning guns unlawfully.
The thing is, the people who like their rhetoric already support them, if they want to garner support they need to do it more rationally and without trying to scare us.
The NRA is a big, wealthy organization. They have a lot of support and I've heard good things about some of the top people in the organization. FROM Democrats interviewed. I don't personally feel the way the NRA does on issues so to me they look damaging to themselves and their cause. But, if i agreed with them, I wonder if I wouldn't feel they were fighting for what I cared about.
I heard an interesting discussion on NPR that stated that the biggest change after Sandy Hook is that Democrats are now able to even approach this subject. It has been taboo because gun ownership has so much support. To discuss ANY type of ban is a very big deal because for a while, many knew they'd never garner the support to push a ban through. If they can this time or not, I don't know. They certainly have more support now than ever to ban assault weapons.
But, the NRA will desperately fight that as is their job as a lobbying group for the cause of the organization.
Hey, maybe I'll kick myself for not having any gun let alone an assault weapon if something occurs creating anarchy. Who knows.
I heard an interesting discussion on NPR that stated that the biggest change after Sandy Hook is that Democrats are now able to even approach this subject. It has been taboo because gun ownership has so much support. To discuss ANY type of ban is a very big deal because for a while, many knew they'd never garner the support to push a ban through. If they can this time or not, I don't know. They certainly have more support now than ever to ban assault weapons.
But, the NRA will desperately fight that as is their job as a lobbying group for the cause of the organization.
Hey, maybe I'll kick myself for not having any gun let alone an assault weapon if something occurs creating anarchy. Who knows.
You didn't read the other posts...I said that there have been natural disaster before and since Katrina where people did not resort to violence and looting, they actually helped each other.
If you read Wayne's full op-ed, he was talking about Sandy and the people who live in Brooklyn...There were no looting or murdering during Sandy...Hr was flat out lying..
Those things happened in New Orleans because they basically have no gun laws...
Those things happened in New Orleans because they basically have no gun laws...
I wasn't talking about owning a gun either rivll. By the way, I'm not trying to argue with you.
"Well the recent disasters didn't cause looting and murdering, so they can just stiflel it.." ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Ever heard of New Orleans?
Ever heard of New Orleans?
I am not talking about owning a gun. That has never been an issue for me or for anyone in this group.
We are all pro gun here..we all understand and support our 2nd amendment rights.
It is the tactic they use I object to and I think it hurts their cause.
"People use whatever they need to to help their position. Especially when the stakes are high."
I say that is unacceptable. They are causing unrest and undue fear and they are not *helping* their cause, they are hurting it.
We are all pro gun here..we all understand and support our 2nd amendment rights.
It is the tactic they use I object to and I think it hurts their cause.
"People use whatever they need to to help their position. Especially when the stakes are high."
I say that is unacceptable. They are causing unrest and undue fear and they are not *helping* their cause, they are hurting it.
Once again, I'll say that the biggest problem in solving this issue is the politics. It almost feels like both sides were waiting for something to happen to let them prove their point.
The entire issue now seems focused on gun control. Is anyone taking a step back and looking at the actual issue anymore? And by that I mean that children are being killed (btw, again referring to politics, not people here). They should be looking at every possibility from mental health issues to access to healthcare to the gun laws...all of it. Instead a very tragic and horrid situation has become political fodder.
The entire issue now seems focused on gun control. Is anyone taking a step back and looking at the actual issue anymore? And by that I mean that children are being killed (btw, again referring to politics, not people here). They should be looking at every possibility from mental health issues to access to healthcare to the gun laws...all of it. Instead a very tragic and horrid situation has become political fodder.
Both sides of those for and those against. People use whatever they need to to help their position. Especially when the stakes are high.
Lots of people are behind what the NRA is saying. They are appealing to a group in this country that do believe in threats of violence against them.
I personally think that when it is my time, it is my time. But I will say that having kids changed that a little bit for me. I'm not sure what I'd stoop to in order to protect my family.
But I also don't fear that I'll ever find out.
However, there are a lot of people that say one should own a gun due to a home invasion or something like that. I don't think these people are fear mongering, they actually feel this way. And the NRA's position speaks to THEM.
It doesn't speak to us because we don't live worrying about such things. (or at least I don't.)
Lots of people are behind what the NRA is saying. They are appealing to a group in this country that do believe in threats of violence against them.
I personally think that when it is my time, it is my time. But I will say that having kids changed that a little bit for me. I'm not sure what I'd stoop to in order to protect my family.
But I also don't fear that I'll ever find out.
However, there are a lot of people that say one should own a gun due to a home invasion or something like that. I don't think these people are fear mongering, they actually feel this way. And the NRA's position speaks to THEM.
It doesn't speak to us because we don't live worrying about such things. (or at least I don't.)
What both sides???
We are talking about the gun lobby. The gun lobby in the extreme is actually harming their own position by using this fear mongering rhetoric.
Katrina was the exception and we need to let go of that and focus on all the diasters before and since where people pulled together and helped each other.
We are talking about the gun lobby. The gun lobby in the extreme is actually harming their own position by using this fear mongering rhetoric.
Katrina was the exception and we need to let go of that and focus on all the diasters before and since where people pulled together and helped each other.
Well, both sides play up whatever issues they need to in order to garner support. Kind of a universal marketing tool.
Katrina was violent. Luckily we don't hear too much of that with other disasters.
Katrina was violent. Luckily we don't hear too much of that with other disasters.
Yep, the old scare tactics.
Well the recent disasters didn't cause looting and murdering, so they can just stifle it.
I hate when they play on our fears to get us whipped up. They have done more to hurt their cause than to help it with this rabble rousing.
Well the recent disasters didn't cause looting and murdering, so they can just stifle it.
I hate when they play on our fears to get us whipped up. They have done more to hurt their cause than to help it with this rabble rousing.
There is some truth to the fact that criminals will always be able to get these types of weapons. blah, hate that. BUT, that doesn't mean we can't try to do 'something'.
I think what they meant regarding the idea of hurricanes is what happened in New Orleans in which violence broke out. ??? that was my take on it. That natural disasters could create situations that result in lawlessness and violence and that in the NRA's mind, people should be armed for.
I've never been in that situation and hopefully never will be. I'll be unarmed and saying "just take the food and water and leave us alone".
I think the NRA is going to try to say whateve they can to appeal to people's idea that they need to be armed even if it is thinking about horrible situations that I hope this country doesn't have to face. They are so desperate, the NRA at this point.
I think what they meant regarding the idea of hurricanes is what happened in New Orleans in which violence broke out. ??? that was my take on it. That natural disasters could create situations that result in lawlessness and violence and that in the NRA's mind, people should be armed for.
I've never been in that situation and hopefully never will be. I'll be unarmed and saying "just take the food and water and leave us alone".
I think the NRA is going to try to say whateve they can to appeal to people's idea that they need to be armed even if it is thinking about horrible situations that I hope this country doesn't have to face. They are so desperate, the NRA at this point.
“Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face—not just maybe. It's not paranoia to buy a gun. It's survival
Geez, I wonder how many bullets can stop a hurricane?
Geez, I wonder how many bullets can stop a hurricane?
"Meanwhile, the NRA's vice president, Wayne LaPierre, wrote an op-ed in the Daily Caller on Thursday warning that gun owners must "stand and fight" against any attempts at gun control. “Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face—not just maybe. It's not paranoia to buy a gun. It's survival. It's responsible behavior, and it's time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that," he wrote."
He has definitely lost his ever loving mind....
He has definitely lost his ever loving mind....
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
