Maybe that's why it's called "member discussions."Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
|
Maybe that's why it's called "member discussions."Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Rep. Marsha Blackburn has challenged our gun-slinging president to a skeet shooting match. What, you didn't know Obama goes skeet shooting "all the time" at Camp David? Blackburn feels confident she would win the match, Obama is probably as skilled as Romney when he goes hunting for "small varmints."
C'mon Mr. President, accept the challenge.Quote:
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) challenged President Barack Obama to a skeet shooting contest and questioned whether Obama really enjoys the hobby as he said in a recent interview.
“If he is a skeet shooter, why have we not heard of this? Why have we not seen photos? Why hasn’t he referenced this at any point in time?” Blackburn said on CNN on Monday night.
She added: “I tell you what I do think — I think he should invite me to Camp David, and I’ll go skeet shooting with him and I bet I’ll beat him.”
He's still working on that bowling stuff. Maybe he can borrow Sec State John F Kerry's hunting outfit.
http://aaworkersleague.files.wordpre...-hunting-4.jpg
Look close enough you can see the price tags .
Does it matter? Why is this important to anyone?Quote:
“If he is a skeet shooter, why have we not heard of this?"
If it doesn't matter to you then feel free to join a different discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello wingers:
So, you're surprised that lefty's like their guns too?? How did you NOT know that?
excon
Different opinions are welcome here, you can't oust anyone because they don't share your zeal for totally unimportant factoids.Quote:
If it doesn't matter to you then feel free to join a different discussion.
How is this in any way important to the gun control issue?
You guys holler he is going to take your gun, and then you holler when he sympathizes with hunters and sport shooters.
I would hate to be a cop and ten people had weapons drawn and have to decide who to shoot. Maybe its different in a rural community with one or two schools and the police are to far away to respond but I would rather have a few experienced well trained cops outside than a few poorly trained teachers in a crowded hallway or classroom.
Thanks for the lecture but making a suggestion is not the same thing as ousting someone. If it's unimportant to you then feel free to ignore the discussion. It's quite simple really.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Surprised that libs own guns? LOL, no. In fact quite a few that lecture us on gun control hide behind them on a regular basis. I am curious as to if that particular liberal goes skeet shooting "all the time" or if he's just pandering.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The guy that wants gun control is pandering by showing that he likes guns? What?Quote:
if he's just pandering
Uh, yes. What do you not get?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hunting and shooting were talked about in previous administrations:
Fox News: Cheney's Quail Hunting Accident Affects No On
(except the guy that was shot in the face)
Cheney's Quail Hunting Accident Affects No One | Fox News
The hypocrisy is incredible, isn't it.Quote:
Fox News: Cheney's Quail Hunting Accident Affects No On
(except the guy that was shot in the face)
Cheney's Quail Hunting Accident Affects No One | Fox News
Yet again you guys always pander to the ones in the echo chamber you live in.
Hunting is the side show... I read the ratification debates... the 2nd amendment wasn't passed to insure our right to hunt.
Haven't you righties learned that resisting arrest no matter the circumstances is a foolish thing to do? Armed conflict with what you think is a tyrannical government can be considered by some as a foolish thing too since we fight in the courts, not the woods.
Maybe a more effective way to bear arms would be through strong communities and even stronger lawyers, especially given no one is going to take what you have, just make some guns unavailable for future loonies which we will be looking closer at.
Its like every other issue we argue in current events you guys have rights the rest of us don't, and yours trump everyone else's, and some deserve none at all.
That's odd because we aren't the ones arguing for a mythical right to force someone else to buy contraceptives. We are however defending your first and second amendment rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by smearcase
Well, to be "fair and balanced" maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
And in other gun control news...
Quote:
Newtown Votes for Armed Guards in Elementary Schools
By Alexander Abad-Santos | The Atlantic Wire – 3 hrs ago
As the nation continues to confront the concept of "good guys with guns" in schools, armed guards are coming in force to Newtown, Connecticut. Late Thursday the Newtown Board of Education voted to request the presence of two kinds of guards inside the town's elementary schools. The vote, for now, only represents a request — it still needs to clear budget and logistical boundaries since the guards would come from the town's police resources as opposed to the school board itself. But the plan "would put two eyes and ears -- one armed, one unarmed -- at each Newtown school," reports Bronxville Patch's Davis Dunavin. The guards, officially called school resource officers (SROs), were already a fixture at all Newtown schools in the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, but until this vote they were budgeted only to be a presence at middle and high Schools, according to NBC Connecticut.
From reports of the school-board meeting, concerned parents cited the Sandy Hook shootings as their reason for backing an armed-guard policy. "The only thing that stopped that guy that day was when the two Newtown police burst in the building," one parent is quoted as saying in the Patch story. "You all know that." Which sounds eerily familiar to the NRA's "good guy with a gun" talking point, even though the Obama administration has backed armed guards if schools want them. One of President Obama's 23 executive actions on gun violence includes the following order: "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."
But make sure they aren't unionized. Volunteer would be best.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
What would have stopped "that guy" would have been no access to guns.
Come on, if someone wants to kill people they will find a way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Twenty first graders (after six adults) with a Bowie knife? A bow and arrow? A big rock?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Why make it easy?
A pickup, a molotov cocktail, some fertilizer...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Quote:
The Oklahoma City bombing was a terrorist bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. It would remain the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11, 2001 attacks. The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6,[1] and Injured more than 680 people.[2] The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a sixteen-block radius, destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings.[3][4] The bomb was estimated to have caused at least $652 million worth of damage.
That would have taken some thought and planning. This way was much easier with almost instant gratification. Yay, guns!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Now, what about the buses and the bus stops?
As if he didn't plan the massacre?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
How would you prefer to kill 26 people, with a semi-automatic rifle or a rock?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
You think the attack was impulsive ? Nahh he planned the attack for a long time. This was a premeditated shooting attack.Why do you think he destroyed his hard drive ? He jungles taped magazines to his rifle so he could quickly reload . The idea that smaller magazines would've made a difference is wishful thinking . He did not stop shooting until the cops came. He had all the time all the time in the world to reload until the cops showed up .Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
But smaller magazines would have been more unwieldy and a pain and fewer kids would have been shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
.maybe.. he shot each multiple times . He had that much time.
Do you know how many semiautomatic handguns with 10 rounds I could fit in a jacket, on my belt, in my pants pockets, waistband, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
But then you would have had to fish around for them and take time to load each one. Let's have a contest -- me with 30-round magazines and you with 10-round ones and see who can load and fire the fastest and hit the most targets.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I really don't think you want to take that bet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
You're right. Too easy for meQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Maybe we cannot always predict or prevent a loony from popping up with bad intentions but we can get known criminals and drive by guys and dope dealers from getting guns from straw purchasers, and pawn shops.
The Newton killer was trained to shoot instead of sent for help. The Colorado punks had issues that were known, and the Arizona dude was just had to easy of a time of it. To say we should just do nothing is unacceptable.
No one that Im aware of is saying to do nothing. But why is it that the mental health aspect of all this including the drugs they were taking not a part of the conversation ? Should we continue to be so quick in passing out drugs like candy that have side effects so bad its causing an epidemic to occur ?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
What do you suggest? (I've read no report yet that Adam Lanza was taking any drugs. Most mass murderers have stopped taking the prescribed drugs and have descended into their psychosis that the drugs kept them from experiencing.)Quote:
Originally Posted by califdadof3
I suggest it be allowed as part of the solution that may be in order. At least address the problem at its core. It will require a harder look at how our rights are applied but it may be needed as a way to address the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
There are many forms it can be applied in. Some persons should not have the right to purchase a gun if in a high risk category. The problem is patient privacy rights. How we address that will have to be a part of the debate. HIPPA is keeping many doctors from reporting things as well as the fine line between treatment and trust. If a person knows they will lose a right by seeking help then why would they seek help in the first place? Its one of many landmines we will have to walk through to address the problems we are having.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:03 PM. |