Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > Firearms and Other Weapons Forum > Firearms General Discussion
Articles Chat Room Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files



Firearms General Discussion Rifles, pistols, shotguns, scopes, grips and everything in between.

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-28-2011, 06:13 PM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default Okay, you'll want to read this ...



Advertise Here

... and honestly, even though I know there are some here that are constantly defending Obango and typing things such as, "Obama has done nothing anti-gun since being elected," which only illustrates their absolute blindness and ignorance; I want to see some of the Obama lovers defending this ...

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/w...n-control.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by excerpted Newsweek
White House to Push Gun Control

Obama intentionally did not mention gun control in his State of the Union, but aides say that in the next two weeks the administration will unveil a campaign to get Congress to toughen existing laws.
Now, this coincides with an announcement made at the Shot Show, by the ATF, the day before the SOTU address as follows:

http://blog.princelaw.com/2011/1/20/...un-importation

Quote:
"... the ATF announced Saturday, at the close of the 2011 SHOT Show that a new ruling would be issued on Monday, January 24, 2011, regarding the importability of certain shotguns. ATF informed the audience at the ATF Townhall meeting that they wanted to ensure that they were properly and justly enforcing the requirements of a shotgun being for a “sporting purpose."
This of course means Saiga shotguns I am sure ... and possibly others. So you'll probably want to get your Saiga now. I'm sure it will also effect the ability to purchase shotguns with telescopic stocks, shorter barrels, folding stocks and/or pistol grips.

Obama is using the ATF to circumvent current laws and implement his own it does appear. For more on the ATF's recent activities, you may visit here:

http://atf.gov/

But I am beginning to really wonder, does the ATF know that they are supposed to be a friend to the good, law-abiding, citizens of this country and that we are the ones who provide for their paychecks? Or do you believe the ATF is the gestapo for Obama, et al, at this point and they view us at the enemies?
Old 01-28-2011, 06:19 PM
hutch18414 hutch18414 is offline
radioactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: n fla
Posts: 720
Thanks: 10,924
Thanked 860 Times in 335 Posts
Default

They may be his Gestapo,but they ain't read their history books. It did not turn out well for the Gestapo and I don't believe it will turn out well for them.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to hutch18414 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-28-2011, 07:45 PM
ManyFeathers's Avatar
ManyFeathers ManyFeathers is offline
Firewater with a Cohiba
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Republic of Texas
Age: 55
Posts: 4,690
Thanks: 5,589
Thanked 10,663 Times in 3,276 Posts
Default

I wished I had stock in either Remington, Winchester or Ruger

All this hype and attention to weapons and ammunition will cause the prices to start spiking again

You would think with the run on weapons and ammo since Obama was elected......that it should say something to these idiots in Washinton. The American People are even more heavily armed and more than ready to take on any government trying to take our weapons.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ManyFeathers For This Useful Post:
Old 01-28-2011, 08:32 PM
kajunman1's Avatar
kajunman1 kajunman1 is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,457
Thanks: 4,713
Thanked 3,480 Times in 1,643 Posts
Default

Buy the folding pistol stocks just don't be caught with them on.
SHTF, eff it
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kajunman1 For This Useful Post:
Old 02-01-2011, 01:14 PM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

I'm not sure many people are paying attention and most evidently believe that since this past election we now have nothing to worry about, but please friends, give it some more thought. All of the pieces are falling into place for what could very well happen if we are not prepared ... we are being warned over and, judging by the low reader count of this thread and the thanks above, very very few of us recognize the seriousness or urgency of what is happening right under our noses.

Here's today's warning direct from Rand Paul in an email that I just received minutes ago:

Quote:
Dear ***my name inserted here***,

Gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently announced the Obama Administration will be working hand-in-glove with the UN to pass a new “Small Arms Treaty.”

Disguised as an “International Arms Control Treaty” to fight against “terrorism,” “insurgency” and “international crime syndicates,” the UN’s Small Arms Treaty is in fact a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.

I’m helping lead the fight to defeat this radical treaty in the United States Senate and I want your help.

Please join me by taking a public stand against this outright assault on our national sovereignty by signing the Official Firearms Sovereignty Survey - MASH HERE.

Ultimately, the UN’s Small Arms Treaty is designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

But looking at previous versions of the UN Small Arms Treaty, you and I can get a good idea of what’s likely in the works.

STOP THE GUN GRAB! - MASH HERE

If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate, the UN “Small Arms Treaty” would almost certainly FORCE the U.S. to:

*** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding Americans cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

*** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL “unauthorized” civilian firearms (all firearms owned by the government are excluded, of course);

*** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons;

*** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION.

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that this is NOT a fight we can afford to lose.

Ever since its founding 65 years ago, the United Nations has been hell-bent on bringing the United States to its knees.

To the petty dictators and one-world socialists who control the UN, the United States of America isn’t a “shining city on a hill” -- it’s an affront to their grand designs for the globe.

These anti-gun globalists know that so long as Americans remain free to make our own decisions without being bossed around by big government bureaucrats, they’ll NEVER be able to seize the worldwide power they crave.

And the UN’s apologists also know the most effective way to finally strip you and me of ALL our freedoms would be to DESTROY our gun rights.

That’s why I was so glad to hear that the National Association for Gun Rights is leading the fight to stop this assault on our Constitution!

The truth is there’s no time to waste.

You and I have to be prepared for this fight to move FAST.

The fact is the last thing the gun-grabbers at the UN and in Washington, D.C. want is for you and me to have time to mobilize gun owners to defeat this radical legislation.

They’ve made that mistake before, and we’ve made them pay, defeating EVERY attempt to ram the “Treaty on Small Arms” into law since the mid-1990s.

But now time may not be on our side.

In fact, we’re likely to only have a few weeks to defeat the treaty when they make their move
.

And we definitely don’t have a President in the White House who will oppose this treaty.

So our ONE AND ONLY CHANCE to stop the UN’s “Small Arms Treaty” is during the ratification process in the U.S. Senate.

As you know, it takes 67 Senate votes to ratify a treaty.

With new pro-gun champions joining me in the Senate, rounding up enough votes to kill this thing should be easy, right?

Unfortunately, that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Even with the Republican tidal wave in November, there still isn’t a pro-gun majority in the Senate to kill ratification of the treaty.

You know just as well as I do how few Senators are truly “pro-gun.”


Not only that, but many Senators get “queasy” about killing treaties for fear of “embarrassing” the President -- especially with “international prestige” at stake.

They look at ratifying treaties much like approving the President’s Supreme Court nominees.

Remember how many Senators turned their back on us and voted to confirm anti-gun Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor?

A dozen more only voted against Sotomayor after receiving massive grassroots pressure from the folks back home.

So if we’re going to defeat the UN’s Small Arms Treaty we have to turn the heat up on the U.S. Senate now before it’s too late!

Do you believe the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment are the supreme law of the land?

Do you believe any attempt by the United Nations to subvert or supersede your Constitutional rights must be opposed?

If you said “Yes” to these questions, please sign the survey the National Association for Gun Rights has prepared for you.

Your survey will put you squarely on the record AGAINST the UN’s Small Arms Treaty.

And along with your signed survey, I hope you’ll send a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35 to help finance this battle.

With your generous contribution, the National Association for Gun Rights will continue contacting Second Amendment supporters to turn up the heat on targeted U.S. Senators.

Not only that, but they’re preparing a massive program to launch the second this treaty is brought before the Senate.

Direct mail. Phones. E-mail. Blogs. Guest editorials. Press conferences. Hard-hitting internet, newspaper, radio and even TV ads if funding permits. The whole nine yards.

Of course, a program of this scale is only possible if the National Association for Gun Rights can raise the money.

But that’s not easy, and we may not have much time.

In fact, if gun owners are going to defeat the UN’s Small Arms Treaty pro-gun Americans like you and me have to get involved NOW!

So please put yourself on record AGAINST the UN’s Small Arms Treaty by signing NAGR’s Firearms Sovereignty Survey.

But along with your survey, please agree to make a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35.

And every dollar counts in this fight so even if you can only chip in $10 or $20, it will make a difference.

Thank you in advance for your time and money devoted to defending our Second Amendment rights.

For Freedom,

Rand Paul
United States Senator
P.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has announced the Obama Administration will be working hand in glove with the United Nations to pass a new GLOBAL, “Small Arms Treaty.”

If we’re going to defeat the UN’s Small Arms Treaty we have to turn the heat up on the U.S. Senate now before it’s too late!

Please return your Firearms Sovereignty Survey and put yourself squarely on the record AGAINST ratification of the UN’s Small Arms Treaty.

And if you can, please make a generous contribution to the National Association for Gun Rights of $250, $150, $100 or even just $35 right away!

And every dollar counts in this fight so even if you can only chip in $10 or $20, it will make a difference.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Gallo Pazzesco For This Useful Post:
Old 02-01-2011, 01:17 PM
SilverSurfer's Avatar
SilverSurfer SilverSurfer is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 7,712
Thanks: 2,032
Thanked 4,878 Times in 2,728 Posts
Default

If you are a Virginia Resident and not a member of the VCDL you are wrong.

http://www.vcdl.org/
__________________
Quote:
But in the long run we have found, Silent films are full of sound, Inaudibly free...
The Following User Says Thank You to SilverSurfer For This Useful Post:
Old 02-01-2011, 02:00 PM
Armchair Commando's Avatar
Armchair Commando Armchair Commando is offline
I almost guarantee it
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 448
Thanks: 252
Thanked 473 Times in 207 Posts
Default

There's no reason why we can't do what the folks of Egypt are doing. When the government goes after our guns it's obvious what they're plan is. Hand over your guns and hand over America.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Armchair Commando For This Useful Post:
Old 02-01-2011, 09:27 PM
Pangea Pangea is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Southern Tennessee
Posts: 4,915
Thanks: 5,006
Thanked 9,352 Times in 2,909 Posts
Default

BATF&E making it's rules up as it goes.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pangea For This Useful Post:
Old 02-02-2011, 06:47 AM
merlinfire's Avatar
merlinfire merlinfire is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,273
Thanks: 14,712
Thanked 16,274 Times in 5,268 Posts
Default

This may come as a surprise to you, but this is simply government doing what government does. This is the result of the GCA of 1968. The sporting purposes clause started there.

Also, when you demonize your opponents by calling them silly names, you instantly lose all credibility. Even if you disagree with someone, at least call them by the name they would call themselves, its only civilized.
Old 02-02-2011, 08:54 AM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlinfire View Post
This may come as a surprise to you, but this is simply government doing what government does. This is the result of the GCA of 1968. The sporting purposes clause started there.

Also, when you demonize your opponents by calling them silly names, you instantly lose all credibility. Even if you disagree with someone, at least call them by the name they would call themselves, its only civilized.
You are frickin' kiddin' me. Another Obango apologist. And Obango is not an opponent, he is an enemy. And you being in his camp - that makes you an enemy too as far as I am concerned.

Anyone who defends Obango and subscribes to his socialist/communist politics is my enemy and an enemy to the Constitution of the United States of America - that is where I've drawn the line, that's what I swore an oath to defend.
The Following 17 Users Say Thank You to Gallo Pazzesco For This Useful Post:
Old 02-02-2011, 10:18 AM
Tucsonlover Tucsonlover is offline
Recent Blog:
Hiker
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 594
Thanks: 6,025
Thanked 905 Times in 365 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallo Pazzesco View Post
You are frickin' kiddin' me. Another Obango apologist. And Obango is not an opponent, he is an enemy. And you being in his camp - that makes you an enemy too as far as I am concerned.

Anyone who defends Obango and subscribes to his socialist/communist politics is my enemy and an enemy to the Constitution of the United States of America - that is where I've drawn the line, that's what I swore an oath to defend.
Gallo Pazzesco: I am with you 100% on your reply. Obama is an enemy to the Constitution. Because of the MSM (propaganda), America is being lied to on a DAILY basis. They are nothing but Obama's mouthpieces. More and more lately, this country is reminding me of the time of Hitler. It scares the heck out me. Wake up America, before it is too late.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Tucsonlover For This Useful Post:
Old 02-03-2011, 08:09 PM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

Here is an emergency alert I just received from our local Grass Roots organization here in SC. These boys are almost always on the money and they are very connected to Jim DeMint's office:

Quote:

*** Action Alert – Possible Magazine Ban ***

3 Februrary 2011 2055 hrs

GrassRoots just received the email below from National Association for Gun Rights. GrassRoots has not had time to verify this, but if true, GrassRoots knew you would want to have this information immediately, since time is of the essence.

Please call Senators Jim DeMint (202-224-6121) and Lindsey Graham (202-224-5972) and tell them you're with GrassRoots GunRights South Carolina and you think any such amendment stinks!

Bill Rentiers
Executive Officer

===========================

Dear fellow Patriot,

I've just received word from inside sources in the U.S. Senate.

Senate Democrats are planning to execute a sneak attack on gun rights as soon as TODAY!

Their plan is to sneak Carolyn McCarthy's Magazine Ban into law as an amendment to the Federal Aviation Administration Bill, a routine piece of generally non-controversial legislation.

And they hope YOU won't notice.

That's why you and I need to make our voices heard RIGHT NOW!

We need to let them know we're watching them like a hawk!

Please call Jim DeMint at 202-224-6121 and Lindsey Graham at 202-224-5972.

Make sure they know about this scheme and that they must oppose Carolyn McCarthy's Magazine Ban every step of the way whether it's attached as an amendment or not.

And make sure they know you're watching.

Thanks for taking action,

Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights

Visit the GrassRoots website at: www.scfirearms.org

Click the box below to join GrassRoots GunRights of SC, the only No Compromise, No Surrender gun rights organization in South Carolina!
When they say "right now" they usually mean it and we have averted more than a few issues here in state thanks to their alerts over the past decade. You may want to call your senator's office tonight and first thing tomorrow morning ... plus copy the above warning to all of the other gun boards and survivalist boards you frequent. I'd say this is a pressing matter - all the signs have been in the works for a couple of weeks and here it comes.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Gallo Pazzesco For This Useful Post:
Old 02-03-2011, 09:43 PM
TacMedMD's Avatar
TacMedMD TacMedMD is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 82
Thanks: 37
Thanked 92 Times in 44 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallo Pazzesco View Post
Here is an emergency alert I just received from our local Grass Roots organization here in SC. These boys are almost always on the money and they are very connected to Jim DeMint's office:



When they say "right now" they usually mean it and we have averted more than a few issues here in state thanks to their alerts over the past decade. You may want to call your senator's office tonight and first thing tomorrow morning ... plus copy the above warning to all of the other gun boards and survivalist boards you frequent. I'd say this is a pressing matter - all the signs have been in the works for a couple of weeks and here it comes.
"Yesterday, many gun owners received emails notifying them that a large capacity magazine ban amendment was going to be attached to the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act (S.223), which is currently being debated in the U.S. Senate.

A little research however shows that no such amendment currently exists on the list of amendments filed."
http://www.ammoland.com/2011/02/03/r...ine-amendment/

Just wanted to clear that up.

I don't doubt President Obama is going to lobby for more gun restrictions (possibly over the next few weeks), but attaching magazine restrictions onto FAA regulations is pushing it even for our congress.
Old 02-03-2011, 11:16 PM
merlinfire's Avatar
merlinfire merlinfire is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,273
Thanks: 14,712
Thanked 16,274 Times in 5,268 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallo Pazzesco View Post
You are frickin' kiddin' me. Another Obango apologist. And Obango is not an opponent, he is an enemy. And you being in his camp - that makes you an enemy too as far as I am concerned.

Anyone who defends Obango and subscribes to his socialist/communist politics is my enemy and an enemy to the Constitution of the United States of America - that is where I've drawn the line, that's what I swore an oath to defend.
Are you for real? Wait, of course you're for real. I'm sorry, but the stuff you're saying....is ludicrous. Step away from the chalkboard for a minute and take a deep breath. If the duly elected president of the United States is a communist, then what is there left to do? I mean, you'll be shuffled off to a re-education camp tomorrow, I suppose. That's what they do to conservatives, you know. Gas 'em. They kill them all. Why? Because that's what socialists do. Surprising everyone else doesn't see what's so obvious, right?
Old 02-04-2011, 09:41 AM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TacMedMD View Post
"Yesterday, many gun owners received emails notifying them that a large capacity magazine ban amendment was going to be attached to the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act (S.223), which is currently being debated in the U.S. Senate.

A little research however shows that no such amendment currently exists on the list of amendments filed."
http://www.ammoland.com/2011/02/03/r...ine-amendment/

Just wanted to clear that up.

I don't doubt President Obama is going to lobby for more gun restrictions (possibly over the next few weeks), but attaching magazine restrictions onto FAA regulations is pushing it even for our congress.
Yep, checked this morning first thing when I got up - made some calls - you already got it. But what else I was told that it is all based on fact and that there is a written (sic: recorded) record of some gal up in NY trying to attach the legislation to an Act that was being debated at the time of the Arizona shooting ... but that she was shot down immediately (pardon the pun). I agree - we're going to have to stay vigilant. I spoke with someone over at Joe Wilson's office and she told me there are several things in the works that the progressives are going to try to sneak through while they have the Senate and the POTUS. Her exact words were, "it's coming, we know it's coming, we just have to be ready for it ..."

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlinfire View Post
Are you for real? Wait, of course you're for real. I'm sorry, but the stuff you're saying....is ludicrous. Step away from the chalkboard for a minute and take a deep breath. If the duly elected president of the United States is a communist, then what is there left to do? I mean, you'll be shuffled off to a re-education camp tomorrow, I suppose. That's what they do to conservatives, you know. Gas 'em. They kill them all. Why? Because that's what socialists do. Surprising everyone else doesn't see what's so obvious, right?
If the POTUS had his way, yes, what you are suggesting might come to pass. But the problem for Obango and for your other progressive chronies is that, thanks to our Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms, we'll pretty much smoke any of the b@$+@rds that come and try to take our guns. And that's why your boy and your chronies are trying to take away our 2nd Amendment Rights, to make takeover easier ... but yeah, what you are claiming, the whole concentration camp inference, yeah, that would probably be where we would be right now if Obango and you progressives had your way. And that is where our kids would be if we let you have your way. Some of us are not going to allow that to happen, this is an important fight against you people and one we had better stay alert to quite frankly .... oh, and when I type "we" I am referring to my other Constitutional Conservative friends around here, not you Obango progressives. BTW, your time is short - you'll not be in power much longer.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Gallo Pazzesco For This Useful Post:
Old 02-05-2011, 11:08 PM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

So now we know how they are coming at us ... using their old cronies over at the NY Times it appears:

Quote:
Another Mistake in The New York Times

By John Lott

Published February 05, 2011 | FoxNews.com


Since the tragedy in Tucson, the New York Times has started an all-out campaign for gun control, with a relentless number of pieces -- news, editorials, and op-eds. In its advocacy, even the news stories are heavily biased by selectively quoting only academics who support pro-gun control positions. These seemingly unbiased sources are then contrasted with opposing views from clearly biased people on the other side, such as an NRA spokesman or a right-wing politician. The implied conclusion: scientific evidence favors gun control, but self-interest stands in the way.

Take two recent news stories by Michael Luo (here and here). He quotes seven academics who agreed with the New York Times position, but no one on the other side was even interviewed. Talk about misrepresenting academic opinion. The overwhelming majority of studies actually supports the claim that more guns mean less crime. Among peer-reviewed studies in academic journals, criminologists and economists studying right-to-carry laws have produced 18 national studies showing that these laws reduce violent crime, 10 indicate no discernible effect and none finds a bad effect from the law. One would never guess that 294 academics from institutions as diverse as Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern, the University of Pennsylvania, and UCLA released an open letter to Congress during 1999 warning that new gun laws were “ill advised.”

A frequent claim in these recent New York Times articles has been that more guns mean more gun deaths (see also here). As evidence, the Times articles usually bring up comparisons across states or a selective set of countries, showing that where people possess more guns, there are also more deaths from guns.

On the face of it, this argument seems very straightforward: the guns must be causing the additional deaths. Yet, a closer look at the numbers reveal that an overwhelming proportion of gun deaths are suicides, not homicides, and that rural areas generally have high suicides. What is driving the correlation is simply the factors linked with rural areas (hunting and gun ownership) and suicides (relatively more unmarried men and isolation).

Simply taking away guns doesn't prevent suicides. If there are guns around, some people will use them to commit suicide. But if guns are not handy, there are still a long list of alternative ways to end one’s life. So, more guns available will enable more gun suicides, but there is no evidence that eliminating guns would reduce total suicide.

There are many reasons that different states or countries have different crime rates, and comparisons across places at one point in time simply won't properly account for them. The UK has a low murder rate relative to the U.S. today, and many attribute it to their lack of gun ownership. But before the UK imposed its first gun laws back in 1920, it compared even more favorably to the United States despite extremely widespread gun ownership.

The New York Times pieces stayed far away from this point. It is no wonder, because no place - not a single one -- that has banned guns has seen its murder rate fall. In the US, murder and other violent crime soared in DC and Chicago after their handgun bans were enacted back in 1977 and 1982, respectively. Conversely, after the Supreme Court recently struck down their bans and gunlock law, murder and violent crime rates in DC and Chicago have fallen. The same pattern has occurred across the world, even for island nations that don't have neighbors to blame for gun smuggling.

One columnist, Nicholas Kristof, claimed that in the seven years after Australia banned some types of handguns and rifles "the firearm homicide rate was almost halved." But note that he does not point to overall homicides. He has good reason to avoid that statistic, as there was no decline in overall homicides during that period. Criminals simply shifted to other ways of killing their victims.

A couple of articles in the Times point to a University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine survey claiming that those who carry guns are far likelier to get shot—and killed—than those who are unarmed. This fails to ask why people carry guns in the first place. Of course, individuals who are threatened and at higher risk tend to carry guns more frequently. The study also includes criminals and gang members among those carrying guns. Furthermore, the survey only included people in Philadelphia who had been shot during assaults, which means that it totally ignored the vast majority of defensive gun uses. That issue has been addressed by other academic studies, though, with the majority of refereed academic studies finding a benefit from law-abiding citizens carrying concealed handguns.

Other attacks are more flippant. A Texas congressman suggesting that people carry concealed handguns after Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' wounding is dismissed by Timothy Egan: "Gohmert has enough trouble carrying a coherent thought onto the House floor. God forbid he would try to bring a Glock to work." No effort is made to look at how careful permit holders actually are. In 2009, 164 out of 402,914 Texas permit holders had their permits revoked, a rate of 0.04 percent, and most are trivial. Or that "It defies logic, as this case shows once again, that an average citizen with a gun is going to disarm a crazed killer," but he made no attempt to discuss why civilians with permitted concealed handguns so regularly stop not only multiple victim public shootings but also violent crimes of all types.

With multiple mistakes per article, the New York Times would never want to compare its error rate to the rate of mistakes by permit holders. But then these biases are so obvious and over the top that accuracy really doesn’t seem to be their goal. Is it really that hard for the Times to quote any academics who disagree with their position?

John R. Lott, Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of the revised third edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2010).
Print Close


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/...mes-172831995/
Old 02-06-2011, 12:53 AM
True Blue's Avatar
True Blue True Blue is offline
Armed Border Collie
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southwest MO
Age: 56
Posts: 4,346
Thanks: 3,944
Thanked 6,448 Times in 3,147 Posts
Default

Thanks Gallo Pazzesco, I have been receiving many of these emails also. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but this is a case where wearing out your welcome with your elected officials is worth the effort. The congress and senate must feel he heat of a p***ed off citizenry. I am calling local and capital offices of each one and emailing. I am writing letters and dropping them in the snail mail. I am calling my state representative and senator and applying pressure to pass that pressure along.

Merlinfire, Really? You think Barry is some middle of the road guy who just happens to have a few hundred friends who are dedicated and avowed communists? 60s bombers? When he is booted from office in a couple of years, that BATFE needs to be gutted as well as half of the government.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to True Blue For This Useful Post:
Old 02-11-2011, 02:26 AM
Gallo Pazzesco's Avatar
Gallo Pazzesco Gallo Pazzesco is offline
Geronimo!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmetto State
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 5,519
Thanked 7,105 Times in 2,051 Posts
Default

Gotta stay vigilant on this one because they are going to try to sneak through anything and everything we allow them to sneak through. Their methodology is to keep chipping away until our gun rights are gone.

We can never lower our guard on this stuff.
Old 02-12-2011, 09:08 PM
duke nukem duke nukem is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 21
Posts: 7,164
Thanks: 26,726
Thanked 12,015 Times in 4,576 Posts
Default

I'm gonna be 18 in a month. I want my guns
Old 02-12-2011, 10:22 PM
kyle1337 kyle1337 is offline
Not To Reason Why...
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,968
Thanks: 821
Thanked 1,489 Times in 743 Posts
Default

f this sh, I'm ****sed. Shall not be infringed, shall not be infringed, shall not be infringed, what is there to not understand. Even if I was liberal which I am of different issues, all the Bill of RIGHTS...make perfect sense.
Reply

Bookmarks



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Must Read.... FranchiseKid Financial Forum 5 12-07-2010 10:46 AM
A Must Read! Ramona M. Faunce Financial Forum 0 03-08-2010 01:12 PM
Healthcare, USSA................ READ READ READ READ‏ SC3M Controversial News and Alternative Politics 10 08-20-2009 04:04 PM
It is all said here, read for yourself Farm boy General Discussion 9 10-11-2008 05:19 PM
Please Read TexasAntifascist General Discussion 9 06-15-2008 08:38 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Kevin Felts 2006 - 2012,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net


This site is Gunny Approved