Congress is in session – but not doing much

by
January 29, 2016

Not a lot gets done in Washington in a presidential election year.

Couple that with a prodigious blizzard which buries the city alongside a fairly pedestrian agenda for January – to say nothing of the upcoming Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. And things are more or less at a standstill on Capitol Hill.

To wit:

  • bobnstuff

    ‘1776’ John Adams: One Useless Man is Called a Disgrace; Two are Called a Law Firm; Three or More Become a Congress.

    The Republican blamed the Democrats for the lack of action. Now who can they blame? The Republicans would rather litigate then legislate. This will be the lease productive congress in history.

    • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

      bobnstuff wrote:

      “This will be the lease {SIC} productive congress in history.”

      That’s a GOOD thing! 🙂

      “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”
      — Mark Twain

      • bobnstuff

        If the country was in great shape then a lazy congress would be alright but with the problems that we have it would be nice to think that the good folks in congress cared. All I can see the republicans doing is attacking the president and Hillary. They also are real good at naming post offices.

        • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

          bobnstuff wrote:

          “They also are real good at naming post offices.”

          Now you are attacking the only thing Hillarity accomplished while serving as US Senator from Noo Yark. 😉

          S. 1241: A bill to establish the ‘Kate Mullany National Historic Site’ in the State of New York.

          S. 3145: A bill to designate a highway in New York as the ‘Timothy J. Russert Highway.’

          S. 3613: A bill to name a post office the ‘Major George Quamo Post Office Building.’

          Imagine you’re a member of Congress – list all the Bills or Resolutions you would introduce in your LibSoc SJW effort to “fundamentally transform the United States of America” (™Barry HUSSEIN o`BeyMe–2008):

          1)
          2)
          3)
          4)
          et seq.

          • bobnstuff

            I know this my come as a shock but I don’t care what different people have done in the past, It’s today and tomorrow that I’m thinking about. Imagine you are a member of congress and you have a VA that doesn’t work. a tax code that no one really understands and people going hungry in a land with food to spare. What would you do. What bills would you put in congress? Now look at what congress is spending the little time they are in Washington doing. Repealing the ACA over and over again, and eight hearings trying to prove that Hillary polled the trigger. How may people will die today from problems that congress might have dealt with had they chosen to? I really don’t care which party they are members of. I want them to do there job, work together and make the country the best that it can be. Let them earn the pay and do their job. Calling names and fighting like school children just doesn’t cut it.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “I know this my come as a shock but I don’t care what different people have done in the past, It’s today and tomorrow that I’m thinking about.”

            Well, Bob:

            “Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
            –George Santayana

            Witness the Democrat Party’s attempt to reinstate the 1994 ‘Assault Weapons Ban’ – which the FBI itself found had not reduced crime one iota.

            “Insanity (is) doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
            — Albert Einstein
            https://avalancheofthesoul.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/einstein-meme.jpg

            “What would you do. What bills would you put in congress?”

            Ah-ah-ah, Bobbie: I asked first. 🙂

            “Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
            — Mark Twain

          • bobnstuff

            You want to know what In would do first. Every person who has served in out armed service would get a Medicaid care. let any member of congress vote against that one. Use the VA for taking care of the problems that the regular health care system can’t. Next fire all contractors doing jobs that the enlisted men can do and take the savings and put it into the pay checks of our service men. Pay our military a wage that reflects what they do for the country. Next have the government stop buying anything from a company that moves their headquarters out of the US. Those are the bills I would present tp congress on day one. Instead of going after Hillary again I would hold hearing on hand gun control. 80% of all gun deaths are from hand guns, most illegal in one way or another. while they are at it they can look into why I can’t get shells for my 22. My list goes on and like a national voter registration so no one can vote twice and while they are at it they can make the people who issue death certificates send a copy to the election board. It’s nice for congress to honor citizens but half the bills in congress seem to be that type. We need a working congress that will as one body attack the problems of our country.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            Well, Bob; you’re all over the board here – and on most we somewhat agree. 🙂

            BTW: look up “TRICARE” (formerly “CHAMPUS”) while you’re at it.

            “I would hold hearing on hand gun control. 80% of all gun deaths are from hand guns, most illegal in one way or another.”

            It seems as though all the gun controllers failed to take note of this from history:

            “[T]o prohibit the citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm, except upon his own premises or when on a journey traveling through the country with baggage, or when acting as or in aid of an officer, is an unwarranted restriction upon his constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
            If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege.”
            –Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, 34 Am. Rep. 52 (1878) – commenting on the RKBA

            IOW: separate the criminal offenders from the weapons – rather that the ill-advised, and UNconstitutional, tactic of separating weapons from the non-criminal citizens.

            See ANY LibSoc congresscritters advocating that “Crime Control” tactic?!?

            It’s a fact that 99.998% of all firearms in this country are never used in a criminal manner – yet you want to disarm the 99.998% because of the misconduct usage of the 0.002%.

            Would you use that same tactic on the many other inanimate objects used to commit crime and mayhem?

            If you were to do that, then ‘Knives or cutting instruments’, ‘Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)’, ‘Poisons’, ‘Explosives’, and ‘Narcotics’ would be banned – not to mention ‘Fire’, ‘Drowning’, ‘Strangulation’ and ‘Asphyxiation’:

            https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls/output.xls

            You will note from this official crime report, ‘Blunt Objects’ are used far more often than those ‘Icky Black Assault Weapon’-subset of ‘Rifles.’

            Furthermore; you will also note that all those ‘Numbers’ are going DOWN (↓) – except for ‘Drowning’ (doubled) and ‘Explosives’ (tripled) – which went Up (↑).

          • bobnstuff

            On hand guns. I don’t want to take legal hand guns away. However there must be a way to keep them from those people who shouldn’t have them. If I know how to do it I wouldn’t be sitting here, I would be making it happen. I’m a gun owner and have been since my dad bought me a .22 for my 12th birthday. I’m not anti guns but I am anti murder. There has to be a way of controlling illegal hand guns. If you can figure it out say something. The best I can come up with is some type of tracking of them and some proof of ownership. Maybe when you buy your gun a few things could happen, first the person selling it to you must be sure you are legally able to own a gun, we do that mostly now but the system still has problems. Next you must prove you can use it safely. One of the reasons I don’t have a hand gun is because I can’t hit the broad side of a barn with one and I don’t feel the need to shoot anyone me included. If you can’t use it safely you shouldn’t be able to carry it. Next when you do get your gun you get an owners card that you need to prove ownership. The gun shop will get it from where ever they got the gun from, the manufacture would create them and log them in with the government and ship them with the gun to the dealer. When the dealer sells the gun he would give the owners card to the buyer. He would also let the government know that it has passed to private ownership. You must have this owners card with the gun or under your control. If you sell the gun you must give the new owner the card. If your gun is missing you will give the card to the police with the report of the theft or lose. If the gun changes hands the card goes with it. If you are picked up with a gun without the card you can either produce the card or have the gun taken away and you go to jail. If you are picked up with a gun that is stolen you go to jail for having it. This doesn’t take any rights away that I can see. Here the part that could be interesting. The police carry a metal detector to check for guns. If you have one hidden you need a carry permit. If you are open carry you need to have your owners card with you. The bonus here is if your gun is stolen you stand a chance of getting it back. Do you see any problem with is idea? The only the the government will know is how many guns are made and if they are in private hands.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “There has to be a way of controlling illegal hand guns.”

            First off: what is YOUR definition of “illegal hand guns”?
            Second: there is no such thing as an “illegal hand gun.”
            Third: I can only suppose you mean “illegal POSSESSION of hand guns.”

            WRT the above: I already addressed that earlier: “separate the criminal offenders from the weapons…”

            “The best I can come up with is some type of tracking of them and some proof of ownership.”

            Since a hand gun is merely a legal tool used illegally, and since Child Pornography is a much larger threat to humans than are hand guns, following your thought processes logically, one must conclude that you would also be for Federal “tracking ownership” of personal computers – seeing as how they are an integral tool of the Child Pornography Industry.

            After all; the cry “Do It For The Children” has long been one of the leading propaganda tools of Gun Control Quislings and Propagandists.

            “Maybe when you buy your gun two things could happen, first the person selling it to you must be sure you are legally able to own a gun, we do that mostly now but the system still has problems.”

            First problem here is the idea that one must PROVE they aren’t a criminal before being “allowed” to exercise a constitutionally-protected RIGHT.

            Having been involved in politics for more than 30 years now, I can attest that there is ZERO being done to prevent convicted violent (and, for the most part: non-violent) felons from registering to vote and exercising a constitutional Right reserved to non-criminals.

            In FACT: LibSoc SJW Democrats go out of their way to PREVENT actual vetting of Voters – all the way up to preventing efforts to insure that the person casting the votes are: 1) really who they claim to be; and 2) that they are casting only a single vote in each election.

            If you do not believe that is a serious problem, simply ‘Google’ these names:
            “Melowese Richardson”
            “Sister Marge Kloos”
            “Russell Glassop”
            “Margaret Allen”
            “Ernestine Strickland”
            “Andre Wilson”
            combined with “vote fraud.”

            And thise are just representative of the few that got CAUGHT!

            😉

            OK: accepting that the current LibSoc SJW cry for “Universal Background Check” is a “back door” attempt at covertly registering all gun owners and, therefore, guns, I am not averse to a “Universal” method of checking any Criminal History of a person to whom you may be selling or transfering a firearm.

            As it is, only Federal Firearms Licensees and LEOs can access the NICS Background Check System – and that system is associated with firearms ONLY.

            I would advocate a system wherein ANY individual would be able to access the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) computerized criminal database for ANY reason whatsoever – either by phone under a “Yes/No” system return to a criminal entry query:

            “Is a ‘Prohibited Person’ as defined by any Federal Statute?”

            or by computer – as it is now for LE agencies – which would reveal a person’s full and complete Criminal History.

            Of course: there goes that oft-time disputed “Right To Privacy.” 😐

            Let the Courts sort that out ex post facto. 😉

            “The police carry a metal detector to check for guns. If you have one hidden you need a carry permit.”

            1) Your first thought has already been addressed and ruled on in the Courts as being virtually “unconstitutional” – as it would be an even worse version of “Stop & Frisk.”

            See ‘John W. Terry v. State of Ohio,’ 392 U.S. 1 (1968), wherein the Supreme Court ruled that for a “Stop & Frisk” to be constitutionally legal, a police officer officer MUST have “reasonable suspicion that would justify the stop and he MUST be able to point to ‘specific and articulable facts’ that would indicate to a reasonable police officer that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed.”

            2) WHY do you believe that any individual U.S. citizen – or legally-present non-citizen – be required to obtain a “permit” to exercise a constitutionally-guaranteed Right? [remembering Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, 34 Am. Rep. 52 (1878)]

            And as to your idea that there need be a “Firearm Ownership Card”: therein lies that pesky “Gun Registration” issue:

            “We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently-owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”
            –Congressman Major Owens (b.1936)

            “I have not one doubt, even if I am in agreement with the National Rifle Association, that that kind of record keeping procedure (gun registration) is the first step to eventual confiscation under one administration or another.”
            –Charles Morgan, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington office, in a 1975 hearing before the House Subcommittee on Crime

            “Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic – purely symbolic – move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.”
            –Charles Krauthammer (b. 1950), Column – Washington Post, April 5, 1996

            Next: In re your belief that recovered stolen guns are ultimately returned to their rightful owners, thereby mentally justifying firearms registration:

            • Your stolen firearm is evidence of at least one crime – the original theft – and so may be held for use as evidence in any subsequent prosecution.
            • If your firearm was subsequently used in the commission of another crime, it may also be held for use of evidence in that subsequent prosecution.
            • Some law enforcement agencies have individual policies regarding the process and timetable for the return of stolen firearms.
            • Some jurisdictions simply do not return firearms once they come into the possession of law enforcement, regardless of the circumstances – they are held indefinitely or destroyed.

            What To Do If Your Firearm Is Stolen
            https://novictims.wordpress.com/2009/08/03/what-to-do-if-your-firearm-is-stolen/

            Noting the last admonishment above: In the very distant past – before I entered into my LE career – I was the victim of “Theft of Property” – to-wit: a handgun – stolen from the locked sleeping area of my race car transporter truck.

            Despite it being reported to the appropriate local LE agency, it was never returned to me – despite the fact that after becoming a LEO I checked NCIC, and discovered that it had been recovered – DESTROYED (at least on paper) – by another LE agency many years earlier.

            Finally: in re your “The only [thing?] the the government will know is how many guns are made…”: they already know – individually via ATF Form 2:

            https://www.atf.gov/file/61531/download

            and annually via ATF Form 5300.11:

            https://www.atf.gov/file/61481/download

            And in closing:

            “I’m not anti guns but I am anti murder.”

            Who isn’t?!?!? No one I know!

          • bobnstuff

            You may have noticed I have said nothing about controlling long guns. The number of people killed with guns like the AK 47 is not really all that big if compared to hand gun deaths. Most people don’t kill themselves with long guns. There are hand guns being brought into our country illegal, any hand gun that has been stolen and any hand gun the has not been sold legally would be illegal in my book. Chicago can only trace about 20% of the guns they pick up that are owned illegally. That mean that a stolen gun isn’t able to be traced and other then the manufacture there is little or no trail as to how that gun got there. When they stole your gun did they steal your wallet? When the found your gun did they have a way of contacting you and was there a law saying that they had to? Did they throw the person who had it in jail? A owners card or proof of ownership is not registration and the only national data base should be of stolen guns and of who sold it. You should have the right to sue the people that destroyed your gun. Your children go through metal detectors every time they go to school, is that a violation of the constitutional rights? Do you have a better idea to get the guns out of the gang member’s hands. We are losing 80 people per day. More guns isn’t the cure. A good guy with a gun will not stop a drive by shooting. It only makes guns easier for the wrong people to get. You say child pornography is a bigger problem, how many people died yesterday from child porno? The government is tracking your internet and there is no constitutional right to privacy on line. You are very anti gun control and sight the constitution as the reason but you would limit voting rights. The right to vote is a constitutional right as well and anything that prevents a person from voting is as bad as stopping them from owning a gun. Maybe we should stop keeping voter registration and records of who votes. By total defense of gun rights means people who have no rights to gun can get them and it’s the price we pay for freedom then the same defense of voters right should have the same rules. As I said I don’t have the answer and if you have a better idea of how to save some of these lives I am open to them. By not trying to do something you are in fact saying you are pro murder.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “You may have noticed I have said nothing about controlling long guns. The number of people killed with guns like the AK 47 is not really all that big if compared to hand gun deaths.”

            I repeat:

            “We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently-owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”
            –Congressman Major Owens

            Adding to that:

            “We’re going to have to take this one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily – given the political realities – going to be very modest. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal – total control of all guns – is going to take time…..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 III; founder of Handgun Control Incorporated (now: the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence), New Yorker Magazine, p.57-58, 26 Jul 76

            and:

            “We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles…that we are unable to think about reality.”
            –William Jefferson Clinton

            as well as:

            “I am one who believes that as a first step, the United States should move expeditiously to disarm the civilian population, other than police and security officers, of all handguns, pistols, and revolvers… No one should have the right to anonymous ownership or use of a gun.”
            –Dean Professor Dean Morris, Director of Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Testimony to Congress

            and:

            “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.”
            –Senator Diane Feinstein, handgun owner with California concealed carry permit

            Moreover:

            “The NRA is right…handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns.”
            –Josh Sugarmann, Executive Director and founder of the gun control group Violence Policy Center (VPC)

            “There are hand guns being brought into our country illegal {SIC}…”

            Could you provide a source for that? I couldn’t even find an anti-gun site that claimed that.

            “…any hand gun that has been stolen and any hand gun the has not been sold legally would be illegal in my book.”

            That falls back to the “illegal POSSESSION of a hand gun” thing.

            A stolen gun is not in and of itself “illegal” anymore than a stolen car is “illegal” because it has been stolen: both are “stolen personal property.”

            “When the found your gun did they have a way of contacting you…”

            All my information was in the original “Offense/Incident Report” generated when the theft was reported. That report was referenced in the NCIC entry. And I had not moved nor changed phone numbers in the interum.

            “…and was there a law saying that they had to?”

            Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Chapter 47: Disposition of Stolen Property

            “We are losing 80 people per day.”

            Really, Bob?

            Maybe you should inform the anti-gun organization ‘The Trace’:

            “As of December 23, a total of 12,942 people had been killed in the United States in 2015 in a gun homicide, unintentional shooting, or murder/suicide.”

            Unless there was a MASSIVE ‘uptick’ in those last eight days, the average was 35+/- people per day – 80% of which were, per FBI statiitcs, reportedly suicides.

            “You say child pornography is a bigger problem, how many people died yesterday from child porno?”

            You realize, of course, that question is a subliminal statement that only crimes resulting in death matter to you – and that child porn is “OK” by you – as long as no one dies.

            “You are very anti gun control and sight {SIC} the constitution as the reason but you would limit voting rights.”

            ‘Assumes facts not in evidence.’

            I am all for limiting voting –— to only those citizens LEGALLY AUTHORIZED to cast votes in any election: federal, state, county, municipal or ‘special district’.

            That is where all those ‘Voter ID’ laws so hated by Democrats come into play – they cut down on the Democrat Party’s ‘Voter Base’.

            Are you ‘For’ or ‘Against’ the requirement of a government-issued photo-equipped ‘Voter ID’ in order to vote, Bob?

            “The right to vote is a constitutional right as well and anything that prevents a person from voting is as bad as stopping them from owning a gun. Maybe we should stop keeping voter registration and records of who votes. By total defense of gun rights means people who have no rights to gun can get them and it’s the price we pay for freedom then the same defense of voters right should have the same rules.”

            That, Bob, is known as ‘argumentum ad absurdum’.

            I’ll close with this which I posted sometime in the past to a discussion somewhat like the one in this Thread:

            You claim to be “in favor of the second amendment,” yet here you are agreeing to yet another of the gun controller’s “incremental infringments” upon the 2nd Amendment.

            When are you going to realize that the ONLY “compromise” these anti-gun types accept is where you/we agree to accept their “reduced” demands, instead of their accepting ANY of ours?

            They consistantly claim “one more ‘reasonable gun control law’;” yet when they get what they want, sure enough they’re back again – wanting yet another ‘reasonable gun control law’ – credo quia absurdum.

            “No matter how much you give, they’ll never stop asking for more.”
            https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CL0x2S3UsAAygW6.jpg

            “Guns are not always the answer, but obtaining a firearm has saved the lives of many… While I favor keeping guns out of the hands of felons, youths and the mentally impaired, I oppose adding more bureaucratic obstacles that attempt to fight crime by disarming its victims.”
            –Peter Alan Kasler, New York Times, July 13th 1991

          • bobnstuff

            Your number of deaths is wrong it will be over double it, around 30,000, but using your numbers, isn’t 35 deaths per day some thing that should be talked about. you are pro death, you haven’t listen to what I’ve said, you are to busy defending your toys. If you have a better way to keep these people from dying lets here it. Since 60% of all gun deaths are from suicides the NRA Idea of more guns make us safer is totally wrong. You keep throwing the anti gun nuts crap at me. I agree that most of their ideas won’t work. I’m looking for ones that will but you aren’t. You are happy to just let them die. If you aren’t part of the solution you are part of the problem.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “Your number of deaths is wrong it will be over double it, around 30,000”

            Those are not “my” numbers — those numbers (12,942, as of 12/23/2015) are straight from the gun control organization ‘The Trace’:

            15 Statistics That Tell the Story of Gun Violence This Year
            Highlighting the trends and data that defined another bloody 12 months in America.
            […]
            As of December 23, a total of 12,942 people had been killed in the United States in 2015 in a gun homicide, unintentional shooting, or murder/suicide.
            […]
            http://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/gun-violence-stats-2015/

            Now, Bib: what is the source of your “80 people per day” (to-wit: 29,300/yr.) disinformation?

            Meanwhile; this from the FBI:

            https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/figs/violent-crime.jpg

            “you haven’t listen to what I’ve said, you are to busy defending your toys”

            A firearm is NOT a “toy”!

            And you claim to be a gun owner. 😐

            “If you aren’t part of the solution you are part of the problem.”

            I’ve given you workable solutions — but since they do not include banning hand gun ownership, you ignore and continue with your gun control propaganda.

            IMHO, you, Bob, are nothing but a Michael Bloomberg/Schwartz György Gun Control Cabal quisling/propagandist.

            Quod erat demonstrandum

          • bobnstuff

            Did you even bother to look at what the FBI chart. It’s not total gun death, go read. Did I say anything about banning guns, No. Did I say anything about needing to register gun owners. No. I come from a family that most likely know more about guns and shooting then you. Because of what I know, I know that gun registration wouldn’t work even if they tried. If I really need a gun I can build one, It might not be pretty but it would kill you anyway. What I have been saying is that we need to find a way to reduce gun death. TheTrace.org piece covers the fact well if you read it. Back to my first question and that is why is congress so concerned about four deaths and not about the thousands from guns in our country?

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “Did you even bother to look at what the FBI chart.”

            Yes.

            “It’s not total gun death, go read.”

            You go read what I wrote – then point out where I said the graph was only about gun deaths.

            “Did I say anything about banning guns, No.”

            You inferred it when you wrote “I would hold hearing on hand gun control. 80% of all gun deaths are from hand guns, most illegal in one way or another.”

            “Did I say anything about needing to register gun owners. No.”

            Yes, you did – right here:

            “Next when you do get your gun you get an owners card that you need to prove ownership. The gun shop will get it from where ever they got the gun from, the manufacture would create them and log them in with the government and ship them with the gun to the dealer. When the dealer sells the gun he would give the owners card to the buyer. He would also let the government know that it has passed to private ownership.”

            That is defacto gun – and OWNER – registration.

            “I come from a family that most likely know more about guns and shooting then you.”

            Well, Bob, let’s see.

            I am:

            Former ATF-licensed Title II Class 2 Machine Gun Manufacturer (pre-19 May 1986)

            Retired Police Firearms Instructor

            Former Military Combat Arms Instructor (CATM) and civilian LE Automatic Weapons Instructor

            Qualified ‘Expert’ in both Pistol and Select-Fire Rifle (the REAL “Assault Rifle”) multiple times.

            Still want to claim you “know more about guns and shooting then (SIC)” me???

            “Back to my first question and that is why is congress so concerned about four deaths and not about the thousands from guns in our country?”

            First: I take it that you never served in the military or in any other form of “going in harm’s way”.

            If you had you would understand the principle of “backup” and “never leave a man behind.”

            SecState Hillary Clinton failed at both!

            Second: You are being totally incorrect when you claim that “congress (is) so concerned…but not about the thousands from guns in our country.”

            My Congressman and Senators think like me on that: “Control the criminal misuser and most gun-related violence will be drastically reduced.”

            Unfortunately, the Democrats don’t actually care about crime and violence – except to give it ‘lip service’ while demanding even more ineffective gun control laws:

            “I don’t care about crime, I just want to get the guns.”
            –Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH)

            “We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy! We’re going to beat guns into submission!”
            –Charles Schumer (D-NY), quoted on NBC, December 8, 1993

            “The fact of the matter is that there is no legitimate use for these (assault) weapons. That was as true in 1994 as it is today.”
            –Charles Schumer

            “The ruling class doesn’t care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake.”
            –Senator Malcolm Wallop (R-WY), in response to Clinton’s Assault Weapons Ban of 1994

            -30-

            “But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. … For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.”
            –Jeff Snyder, Washington Times, August 25, 1994

            “Firearms have been around for over 400 years, yet it is only in the last 20 years that people have begun shouting gun control – Why then, only recently, has this become such an issue? Moreover, why are there more mass-murderers than at any other time in our known history? It is not because weapons are more powerful – 200-year-old muzzleloaders have a much greater force-per-round than today’s assault rifles – It is not because weapons are semi- or fully-automatic – rapid-fire weapons have been available for most of the last century. It is not due to a lack of laws – we have more gun control laws than ever. It IS, however, because we have chosen to focus on gun control instead of crime control or thug control– It IS because only recently has the public become complacent enough to accept, by inaction, the violence present in our society.”
            –Kevin Langston

          • bobnstuff

            You have done a lot with guns but as a family we may just have some chops in the world of guns to. My dad was an ordnance officer in the Army Air Corp and helped set up ordnance plants for WW II then went into bomb disposal. He was an expert on 13 different weapons. My oldest brother is a NRA black power instructor and a gunsmith. He has published in Muzzle Blast and is a revolutionary war reenactor. My next brother while in the Army was an expert on 10 weapons and shot on his base pistol team as did my other brother who was in the navy. My nephew the cop has his an her AK 47’s. My cousin was the person that sold the Army on the M1 Abrams Tank. I had dummy 50 caliber shells in my toy box and can shoot a group that you can cover with a half dollar. My family has been building guns for over 200 years,

            If you have the military back ground you clam then you would know who is in charge of security of our embassies, It’s not the secretary of state, it’s the station chef. On the night in question they would not have called Hillary except to let her know what had happened. Ms. Clinton is a lawyer, not an expert in embassy security. Even if Ms. Clinton wanted to send in troops she would have had to ask the military since she has no authority over the military. In other words she could not have said yes or no in this case.

            Once again you are really hung up on saying I would take you guns away. I’m not even a democrat and I agree that most of the gun control laws being put forth are a total waste. I will as you one last time how do you get the guns out of the hands of criminals. You chart is not total gun deaths it is violent crimes. Total gun deaths are are 30,000 per year. One fact is the states with more guns have more gun deaths. If you have a gun in your house you are four times more likely to be shoot. These are facts. If you can reduce gun deaths in our country you should do it.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            “If you have the military back ground you clam then you would know who is in charge of security of our embassies, It’s not the secretary of state, it’s the station chef {SIC}.”

            First off: please work on your basic spelling [and no spacing in the middle of words :-/ ]; to-wit: just all`round better proof reading.

            Second: Christopher Stevens was not in an “embassy” – his operation was located in a Consulate (actually: a temporary U.S. mission) – and his CIA “station chief” was located elsewhere – in the Annex Building two klicks (approx. mile and a quarter) away:

            http://www.standupamericaus.org/sua/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/timthumb.jpg

            Third: it was former SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, CIA contractors to the State Department, who called for military backup.

            Moreover:

            Hillary Clinton’s State Department cut security in Libya before deadly terror attacks, Sen. Ron Johnson says
            http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/rulings%2Ftom-true.gif
            http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/may/19/ron-johnson/hillary-clintons-state-department-reduced-security/

            “One fact is the states with more guns have more gun deaths. If you have a gun in your house you are four times more likely to be shoot {SIC}. These are facts.”

            Your “facts” are Gun Controller BULL$HIT!

            For an self-professed “pro-gun” person, you sure are susceptible to all the anti-gun propaganda and “spin.” 😐

            Worse yet: you readily pass it on. 🙁

            Try this re your first claim:

            No, states with higher gun ownership don’t have more gun murders
            By David Freddoso (@freddoso) • 10/3/15 4:50 PM
            http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-states-with-higher-gun-ownership-dont-have-more-gun-murders/article/2573353

            Gun Laws, Deaths and Crimes
            By Lori Robertson | The Wire
            Posted on October 4, 2015
            http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

            Zero correlation between state homicide rate and state gun laws
            By Eugene Volokh | Washington Post
            October 6, 2015
            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/06/zero-correlation-between-state-homicide-rate-and-state-gun-laws/

            Chart of the day: More guns, less gun violence between 1993 and 2013
            Mark J. Perry @Mark_J_Perry
            December 4, 2015 10:31 pm | AEIdeas

            https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns4.jpg

            https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns31.png

            Bottom Line: Even if you’re not convinced that increased gun ownership reduces violent crime and gun homicides, you should be totally convinced of this indisputable fact: Gun violence has been decreasing significantly over time, not increasing as you’ll frequently hear from anti-gun politicians and progressives. The gun-related homicide rate of 3.6 deaths per 100,000 population in each of the years 2010, 2011 and 2013 makes those recent years the safest in at least 20 years, and possibly the safest in modern US history, since “older data [before 1993] suggest that gun violence might have been even more widespread previously,” according to Ehrenfreund.

            https://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/

            As to your second claim:

            Debunking Mother Jones’ ’10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down’
            By Nick Leghorn on May 30, 2014
            […]
            Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
            Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
            • For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.
            • 43% of homes with guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.
            • In one experiment, one third of 8-to-12-year-old boys who found a handgun pulled the trigger.

            Uh, what’s wrong with that? People who don’t own a gun can’t kill themselves with a gun. That seems like a pretty common sense thing to me, but apparently MJ believes that this proves guns are dangerous. Question to Mother Jones: does the accidental death rate increase in households with firearms? That would be newsworthy and an actually effective argument if it were true. But it isn’t.

            Firearms-related accidental deaths are so statistically insignificant that even if we were to outlaw all firearms and confiscate every single one, we wouldn’t notice a difference. In fact, I have this graph to prove it:

            http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/AccidentDeathOverall.jpg

            To me, that’s reason enough to chuck Mother Jones’ assertion that people would be safer without a gun in their home. Nevertheless, I need to go for the kill (metaphorically speaking, of course) on this one.

            The underlying concept is that more guns = more accidental deaths. Gun ownership has been rising for decades and there’s been a spike in gun sales since 2008, so there should be more firearms-related fatalities, right? At least, that would be the case if Mother Jones’ hypothesis were correct. Unfortunately…

            http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/AccidentDeathGunLine.jpg

            Accidental deaths are on the decline. Even with a boom in firearms sales, there are fewer and fewer firearms-related accidental deaths. QED, having a gun in the house does not necessarily put you at a greater risk for killing yourself.

            As for the statement that defensive gun uses are outweighed by murders and other crimes involving guns, Mother Jones doesn’t seem inclined to cite their sources for that statistic. They just link to another long-outdated study (this one from 1998) that uses long-since debunked methodology and figures. Even the Violence Policy Center puts the number of defensive gun uses in the United States at over 50,000 per year, which doesn’t even come close to matching the numbers that MJ apparently snatched out of thin air.
            […]
            http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/foghorn/debunking-mother-jones-10-pro-gun-myths-shot/

            And if you really and truly believe that gun control can end violence; well, Harvard believes differently:

            Harvard Publication On Gun Laws Resurfaces As Talks About Firearms Continue
            A study comparing international gun laws shows that getting rid of firearms might not be the solution to reducing overall violence.
            By Steve Annear | Boston Daily | August 30, 2013, 4:17 p.m.
            […]
            …the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.
            […]
            http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/08/30/harvard-gun-study-no-decrease-in-violence-with-ban/

            p.s.: Your family’s excellent arms background doesn’t make you a “gunz xspurt.”

            Can you completely disassemble (not merely “field stripping”) – down to the empty receiver – then reassemble – the M16 select-fire assault rifle blindfolded – by touch alone?

            I can. 🙂

            How about completely disassemble the M1911 .45 pistol all the way to the bare frame – including removing the grip panels – without using a single hand tool?

            Again: I can. :-))

            [Look up AFSC 3P051B “CATM” for a hint.]

            p.p.s.: I forgot to include that I am an NRA Firearms Instructor, as well.

          • bobnstuff

            It’s gun deaths not just murders. The number one tool for suicide is handguns. 60% of all gun deaths are suicides. Most suicides by guns use hand guns.

          • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

            OK, Bob: let’s analyze this.

            Let me start by stating that I find it extremely troubling that a “pro-gun” person would be pushing the anti-gunners’ position/spin and “statistics.”

            “Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.”
            —Mark Twain

            “It’s gun deaths not just murders.”

            1. Guns do not ‘die’ — ergo: the proper statement is ‘gun- (or ‘firearm-) related deaths.’ {‘nit’ has been ‘picked’}
            2. The way you put this, an inciteful person would take it that you only care about murder when it’s gun-related. 😐

            “The number one tool for suicide is handguns. 60% of all gun deaths are suicides. Most suicides by guns use hand guns.”

            1. Most people who decide to take their own life would reasonably choose a method that would cause them the least amount of pain and suffering. A firearm fills that desire well.

            2. Using your stated “60%” figure (though some say it’s more like 70+%) and plugging it into the CDC’s reported total number of suicides for 2012 in the U.S. of 33,636 firearm-related deaths reveals:

            Suicide: 20,181
            All other: 13,454

            Earlier on, I posted a figure from ‘The Trace’ that thru 12/23 there had been 12,942 non-suicide-related deaths via firearm usage.

            You replied with “Your number of deaths is wrong it will be over double it, around 30,000.”

            Nevertheless; the Suicide.org’s world-wide reported suicide rate shows that Japan ranks at #9, while the U.S. ranks at #43.

            And as we all know, private ownership of firearms of all types in Japan is virtually nil — and the University of Sydney’s ‘Gun Policy Organization’ reported only 47 ‘suicide by firearm’ deaths — so would you care to relate why there are WAY more non-firearm related suicides in Japan than here?

            ‘Inquiring minds want to know.’

  • BOC

    Well Bundy and his tea party crazies, have just demonstrated by occupying federal land in Oregon why the American people cannot put them in charge at the white house or of our nuclear arsenals.

    What sane person would threaten and aggressively approach a team of law enforcement officers, while at the same time, reach for their gun?

    A: A person who could never pass anyone’s psychological test.

    • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

      Ben Carter wrote:

      “Well Bundy and his tea party crazies…”

      We already know that you are a card-carrying LibSoc SJW Democrat, Ben – now we also know you are an ill-informed one, too.

      Bundy is registered as a member of the ‘Independent American Party’ – a ‘paleolibertarian political party’:

      http://www.independentamericanparty.org/
      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Independent_American_Party_logo.png

      • BOC

        Bundy is going to jail, plain and simple. Convoluted thinking is what got rancher and land protester, LaVoy Finicum shot and killed. He beliefs and aggressive behavior while approaching law enforcement and reaching for his gun bordered on suicide.

        This fringe group you claim to be a legit political party is no doubt on the federal government’s radar screen as a subversive group which Finicum demonstrated to no avail.

      • BOC

        NO! What you know is that I’m speaking the truth. Have the rest of those renegades come to their senses and honored the Bundy pleads to cease and desist or are they waiting to join LaVoy Finicum?

  • BOC

    Thanks to the tea party and other extreme GOP conservative obstructionists, nothing constructive has materialized in seven years from congress. Thank God the POTUS was creative and innovative enough to work around these impediments which were detrimental to the country and it’s people.

  • marlio

    I have noticed them doing much, Congress, the last 8 years!!!! Especially the Republicans, if you call caving in to the Democrats work.

    • BOC

      What you have witnessed over the past 7 years, is the result of the damage ‘gerrymandering’ has done to the political process and the faulty operation of government during the ‘W’ Bush administration and the current state of congress today.

      • Juanito Ibañez, TopCop1988

        Ben Carter wrote:

        “What you have witnessed over the past 7 years, is the result of the damage ‘gerrymandering’ has done to the political process and the faulty operation of government during the ‘W’ Bush administration and the current state of congress today.”

        FYI, Ben:

        1) Redistricting is done every ten (10) years after each decennial Census is completed; so it has been accomplished at least once in “the past 7 years;”

        2) ‘gerrymandering’ is done by both political parties;

        3) ‘gerrymandering’ was created by a Founding Father – Democratic Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry – in 1812:

        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/The_Gerry-Mander_Edit.png
        –Elkanah Tisdale (1771-1835) – originally published in the Boston Centinel, 1812.

        and,

        4) you really should seek professional psychiatric help for that serious case of ‘BDS’ with which you are terminally afflicted.

        • BOC

          Political Science has to be looked at analytically which seems to be way over your head. Go take a couple of college Poli Sci classes, then come back and dialog with me. Oh! and by the way, when you successfully complete them, go look at Texas and Tom Delay’s shannahan’s that finally caught up with him and his political career on Capitol hill. They ran him and Newt Gingrich out of town.

        • BOC

          BDS anyone?

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative