Political Crossfire Forums

[Wolverine]

Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:

[lilwolf]

All the brady camp has ever done is flat out misrepresnt facts and use old fashioned scare tactics.

They always have the idea that guns kill...and thry try to exploit that.. I often think they are stuck on stupid in that respect. There are several hundred things they want people to believe but every songle one can so easily be taken apart and shown how they twist and manipulate fact and numbers.

In good old english....they lie through their teeth. :td:

[Buhness]

Wolverine wrote: Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:
Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier to kill people.

[evil muppet]

The 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN' line doesn't get me to donate to solve African hunger, buy those crappy cookies or stop my smoking in public places. Why in the hell would I care about this?

[lilwolf]

Here are a few examples of some of the brady bill lies and manipulation:


The Justice Department announced on June 21, 1998, that presale handgun background checks mandated by the Brady Act and by state laws resulted in 69,000 people's being denied permission to purchase guns in 1997. The White House issued a statement the same day in which President Clinton proclaimed that, since the Brady Act's passage, "law enforcement officials have stopped hundreds of thousands of felons, fugitives and stalkers from buying handguns every year." White House spokeswoman Nanda Chitre attributed the stunning discrepancy between Justice Department and Clinton numbers to an "editing mistake."

The Clinton administration is also deceptive in its claims that stopping felons from buying a gun in a gun store automatically stops them from acquiring a weapon. According to a 1991 Justice Department survey of convicts, most guns used to commit crimes have themselves been acquired illegally or on the black market. Felons who attempt to purchase firearms can be sentenced to prison for 10 years. Unless Brady law violators are arrested and convicted, the Clinton administration can have no idea of how many criminals actually failed to acquire guns because of the 1993 law. Despite Clinton administration claims on how dangerous illicit-gun buyers are, the federal government prosecutes fewer than one in a thousand supposed violators. The number of convictions from prosecutions for making false statements on Brady forms declined from 253 in 1994 to 36 in 1997. According to Justice Department spokesman Gregory King, the law's objective was "to keep people from getting guns — not to increase federal prosecutions."

The Brady Act banned law-enforcement agencies from using background check information to compile registration lists of gun owners. But some law-enforcement agencies blatantly violate this provision of the law



http://www.fff.org/freedom/1098e.asp


The entire link has a great deal more of their bogus claims.
I have about 2 dozen of these types of links so if any of the brady supporters want to take it on, I will be more than happy to sink the boat.

[Wolverine]

Buhness wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:
Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier to kill people.
Thats true, but so does the rock out in the yard.

lilwolf wrote: Here are a few examples of some of the brady bill lies and manipulation:


The Justice Department announced on June 21, 1998, that presale handgun background checks mandated by the Brady Act and by state laws resulted in 69,000 people's being denied permission to purchase guns in 1997. The White House issued a statement the same day in which President Clinton proclaimed that, since the Brady Act's passage, "law enforcement officials have stopped hundreds of thousands of felons, fugitives and stalkers from buying handguns every year." White House spokeswoman Nanda Chitre attributed the stunning discrepancy between Justice Department and Clinton numbers to an "editing mistake."

The Clinton administration is also deceptive in its claims that stopping felons from buying a gun in a gun store automatically stops them from acquiring a weapon. According to a 1991 Justice Department survey of convicts, most guns used to commit crimes have themselves been acquired illegally or on the black market. Felons who attempt to purchase firearms can be sentenced to prison for 10 years. Unless Brady law violators are arrested and convicted, the Clinton administration can have no idea of how many criminals actually failed to acquire guns because of the 1993 law. Despite Clinton administration claims on how dangerous illicit-gun buyers are, the federal government prosecutes fewer than one in a thousand supposed violators. The number of convictions from prosecutions for making false statements on Brady forms declined from 253 in 1994 to 36 in 1997. According to Justice Department spokesman Gregory King, the law's objective was "to keep people from getting guns — not to increase federal prosecutions."

The Brady Act banned law-enforcement agencies from using background check information to compile registration lists of gun owners. But some law-enforcement agencies blatantly violate this provision of the law



http://www.fff.org/freedom/1098e.asp


The entire link has a great deal more of their bogus claims.
I have about 2 dozen of these types of links so if any of the brady supporters want to take it on, I will be more than happy to sink the boat.
:lol:
They can't even get a paragraph straight.

[Blinky]

Wolverine wrote: Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:

Wolverine, I realise this was discussed very recently on another thread, but missiles are not alive either, nor do they drive people to commit crimes, yet you believe they should be limited/restricted.

Before you leap into how my owning a bomb endangers my neighbours, you're owning a gun endangers your neighbours as has been discussed on other threads.

See if you can offer a valid reason why you should be able to pick and choose which arms are to be protected under the constitution and which are not without making reference to explosives not being defensive weapons. They are, and can be, just as guns are and can be used as offensive weapons.

[lilwolf]

Blinky, guns cannot endanger people ...they are an innanimate object.

If that were the casethen there would be lots of dead people in my neighborhood, and if that were the case then my guns are broken because they have killed nor endangered no one at all.

Explain to me how any gun can kill someone.


People do the killing here and where ever, but not the weapons at all

[Wolverine]

Blinky wrote:
Wolverine, I realise this was discussed very recently on another thread, but missiles are not alive either, nor do they drive people to commit crimes, yet you believe they should be limited/restricted.
Hmmmm.. maybe because a missile is guided? *gasp*

Quote: Before you leap into how my owning a bomb endangers my neighbours, you're owning a gun endangers your neighbours as has been discussed on other threads.
Really? They are unloaded, and in the safe. How is that a danger?

Quote: See if you can offer a valid reason why you should be able to pick and choose which arms are to be protected under the constitution and which are not without making reference to explosives not being defensive weapons. They are, and can be, just as guns are and can be used as offensive weapons.
I don't pick and choose, I find a balance between citizen A's rights and citizens B's rights.

[Æ]

Buhness wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:
Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier to kill people.
It takes less skill to stone a person than it does to shoot them.

Perhaps a duel with stones will suffice.

[Blinky]

lilwolf wrote: Blinky, guns cannot endanger people ...they are an innanimate object.

If that were the casethen there would be lots of dead people in my neighborhood, and if that were the case then my guns are broken because they have killed nor endangered no one at all.

Explain to me how any gun can kill someone.


People do the killing here and where ever, but not the weapons at all

Explain how a missile can kill someone without a human involving themselves in the calculated launching of it.

[Blinky]

Wolverine wrote:
Hmmmm.. maybe because a missile is guided? *gasp*

You believe a missile should be banned because they are guided? Eh? Sorry, I don't follow.


Quote: Really? They are unloaded, and in the safe. How is that a danger?

I meant in the way that people who commit crimes will do so armed, and shoot first if they feel threatened.


Quote:
I don't pick and choose, I find a balance between citizen A's rights and citizens B's rights.

Yes you do. You have stated that missiles (which are arms by all definitions) should be restricted whereas guns should not.
Its like saying "I'm not a racist. I only hate Asians".
Are you for the control of arms, or against the control of arms, Wolverine?

[The Newb]

rather than banning guns mandate education of such weapons, coming from a house where i was taught to shoot and handle guns at age 11 i have a great respect for firearms of all types

[lilwolf]

Blinky wrote: lilwolf wrote: Blinky, guns cannot endanger people ...they are an innanimate object.

If that were the casethen there would be lots of dead people in my neighborhood, and if that were the case then my guns are broken because they have killed nor endangered no one at all.

Explain to me how any gun can kill someone.


People do the killing here and where ever, but not the weapons at all

Explain how a missile can kill someone without a human involving themselves in the calculated launching of it.


I have heard many people here either say or imply that guns kill people. The gun cannot any more than your missle. It takes the human element and we both agree on that.
The point is that to many people always scare the crap out of folks by saying things like...if you get a gun your chances are greater to get shot by the gun.
That is what the myth is all about. How people blame death and homicides on a gun.
It is a tool and if used properly it can save lives and has, thousands of times every year.

[lilwolf]

The Newb wrote: rather than banning guns mandate education of such weapons, coming from a house where i was taught to shoot and handle guns at age 11 i have a great respect for firearms of all types


Here in my state where I grew up I was taught also at any early age what guns were for. Education for kids and adults is one of the best ways to get people over their fears of a gun.

I would even be in favor of a class before you get to have the gun. Do that in all states and you have an educated society.

[mattman42]

I can't help but feel a bit embarrassed for the anti-gunners here, because their arguments are soooo weak.

[mattman42]

lilwolf wrote: The Newb wrote: rather than banning guns mandate education of such weapons, coming from a house where i was taught to shoot and handle guns at age 11 i have a great respect for firearms of all types


Here in my state where I grew up I was taught also at any early age what guns were for. Education for kids and adults is one of the best ways to get people over their fears of a gun.

I would even be in favor of a class before you get to have the gun. Do that in all states and you have an educated society.

It doesn't take a genius to use a gun properly. All we need to do is continue including those neat little gun safety booklets with the firearm. Three rules. It's not that hard and you don't need a class to learn them. You just need to have an IQ over 70 or so.

Nonetheless, to expand on your suggestion... why not include a gun safety class in high school? That way if things were the way you suggested (formal training required), everyone who graduates would already be qualified. I'm just throwing out some suggestions, I'm not the least bit in favor of requiring anything (aside for not being a homicidal maniac) for purchasing guns.

[Green]

Buhness wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quote: How Many More Children Have to Die?

Another school tragedy as a result of guns — how many more times do we have to hear the same thing? Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bailey, Colorado. Green Bay, Wisconsin. Hillsborough, North Carolina. Essex, Vermont. And that's just a partial list of school shootings since the start of this academic year.

There is one common thread through all these tragedies — it was too easy for the wrong person to get deadly weapons. This happens all too often in all parts of our nation.
http://www.handguncontrol.org/

The only way that the Brady Campaign can accomplish it goals is through death, especially children. So they jump in glee at the thought of a school shooting because it is what they can use as leverage to restrict/ban guns.

What they don't understand is that guns are not alive, they do not drive people to commit crimes. Insanity causes people to do insane things.

Its a sorry life when you must exploit the deaths of children for your own political gain. :evil:
Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier to kill people.

An insane trucker could have killed the girls at the amish school with his fists or a knife. Also, modern weapons is against what the amish believe in, so the weapon was not legal in the first place.

[Wolverine]

Blinky wrote:
I meant in the way that people who commit crimes will do so armed, and shoot first if they feel threatened.
But what does that have to do with my guns?


Quote:
Yes you do. You have stated that missiles (which are arms by all definitions) should be restricted whereas guns should not.
Its like saying "I'm not a racist. I only hate Asians".
Are you for the control of arms, or against the control of arms, Wolverine?
I already told you, balancing the rights of A and B.

Missiles are guided and explosive, they can easily accidentaly infringe on the rights of others. Gun on the other hand, cannot do that so easily.

[wyldejackyl]

Buhness wrote:
Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier to kill people.

So do cigarettes and alcohol. We sell both, publicly, to anyone of adult age.