Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-12-2013, 10:47 AM  
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Democrat Manual: How To Lie About Gun Control

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/democrat-...t-gun-control/

DEMOCRAT MANUAL: HOW TO LIE ABOUT GUN CONTROL

Democratic strategists have drafted a how-to manual on manipulating the public’s emotions toward gun control in the aftermath of a major shooting.

“A high-profile gun-violence incident temporarily draws more people into the conversation about gun violence,” asserts the guide. “We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.”

The 80-page document titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging,” (http://s3.documentcloud.org/document...uide-pdf-1.pdf) also urges gun-control advocates use images of frightening-looking guns and shooting scenes to make their point.

“The most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak,” the guide insists. “The debate over gun violence in America is periodically punctuated by high-profile gun violence incidents including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek. When an incident such as these attracts sustained media attention, it creates a unique climate for our communications efforts.”

Apparently, as President Obama’s former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

The manual offers a step-by-step guide on how to stir up sympathy for victims, arrest the “moral authority” from opposing groups like the National Rifle Association and keep the debate emotional instead of allowing facts to interfere.

“Essentially it’s a how-to book on inciting a moral panic,” comments James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal.

The guidebook, discovered by the Second Amendment Foundation and reported by Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner, was prepared by four strategists including Al Quinlan of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, which touts it is “committed to progressive goals,” and includes among its clients the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, among dozens of other left-leaning organizations.

The manual opens by claiming three key arguments are the most “powerful” when trying to grip the public: “One: The serious personal toll that gun violence takes on people’s lives, Two: People’s right to be free from violence in their communities; Three: The changing nature of weapons towards more powerful, military-style ones that make us less safe.”

“The notion that today’s weapons are different in kind from what was available in the past is an especially powerful idea and helps make the case for new levels of concern and scrutiny around access to weapons,” the manual posits, a tip seen in wide action following the Newtown school shooting, as national debate broke out over the AR-15 rifle and the size of ammunition magazines, with gun-control advocates frequently referring to these as “military-style” weapons or “automatic rifles,” when neither description is technically accurate.

Key arguments in mind, the manual then offers a step-by-step guide on how to frame an intensely emotional discussion, beginning with Step 1: “Always focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence,” followed by Step 2: “Tell stories with images and feelings,” then Step 3: “Claim moral authority,” Step 4: “Emphasize that extraordinarily dangerous, military-style weapons are now within easy reach across America.”

Later tips remind gun-control advocates to, “Always start with the pain and anguish that gun violence brings into people’s lives,” and, “Use statistics to support an emotional argument, not to replace it.”

Even when the manual does get around to dealing with facts instead of emotional appeals, offering a list of statistics and factoids that are easy to memorize and keep at hand, the authors admit, “These aren’t a comprehensive statement of the most critical facts about the issue – just a quick guide to a few items with powerful communications potential.”

Finally, the document is interspersed with several examples of how to counter a gun-rights advocate’s arguments.

For example, the manual suggests, if someone were to say, “If an honest citizen with a gun were present, this [tragedy] would not have happened,” a gun-control advocate should counter with, “There’s not a shred of credible evidence that more guns and more shooting save people’s lives. More guns and more shooting mean more tragedy.”

But Jeff Knox, director of the Firearms Coalition, warns gun-control campaigns like this specifically direct advocates to shy away from facts because they’re based on trying to fool the public.

“That gun-control playbook is full of lies,” Knox told WND, “with the biggest one being in the opening statement that they have the facts and logic on their side, but that we use emotion and money to advance our cause.

“The opposite is true and demonstrated by the suggestions in the book,” he continued. “They depend on emotion and fear, because reality does not support their position. Gun control doesn’t work. It never has. If it did, there would be ample evidence, but the only evidence they have is so weak and suspect, even anti-gun panels for the Centers for Disease Control and the Science Foundation couldn’t find any strong evidence of gun-control efficacy.”

In a WND column earlier this year, Knox specifically countered the guidebook’s argument that “more guns and more shooting mean more tragedy.”

“Reviews of existing literature going back to the 1970s have consistently found no connection between gun control and crime,” Knox wrote. “On the other hand, there are several peer-reviewed studies which show that guns in private hands are used to stop crimes more often than they are used to commit crimes, and that the prevalence of guns appears to result in reduced violent crime.”

Though the guide was originally produced in 2012, prior to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., Bedard commented that gun-control advocates in Washington seemed to have taken a page right out of the guidebook following the shooting.

“Clearly the president and other Democratic leaders followed the talking points,” Bedard wrote. “The talking points, for example, suggest phrases politicians should use [when] speaking about mass shootings, and at least three were adopted by the president in just one speech last March on gun violence.”

In fact, the woman introducing Obama for that speech, Katerina Rodgaard, followed the guide’s advice perfectly, beginning with the first key argument, the “personal toll” of gun violence.

“I have been personally affected by gun violence,” Rodgaard began. “As the mother of a first-grader, I cannot even look at my own daughter without thinking about the poor, innocent victims at Sandy Hook. My heart breaks for them and their families and the families of the eight children every day who are killed by guns in this country.”

She then followed in order with the second key argument, the “right” to be free from violence: “I feel that my rights to feel safe in this country and the rights of our children to feel safe in this country are paramount and worth fighting for.”

Obama then followed with the third key argument – fear of military-style weapons – pledging Congress would vote to “keep weapons of war and high-capacity ammunition magazines that facilitate these mass killings off our streets.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/democrat-...5rWBw6IWhJx.99
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 07:21 AM   #16
rockymtnchief rockymtnchief is offline
Supporter
 
rockymtnchief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Crazys of Montana
Casino cash: $5840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radar Chief View Post
It was, I was firing back sarcasm of my own.
Running on 3 hours sleep. I aint two bryte this mornin'.
__________________
Posts: 4,315
rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 08:08 AM   #17
Frazod Frazod is offline
Banned
 
Frazod's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: my own personal pig hell
Casino cash: $5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
What if the cause is trying to prevent more dead children in the future?

Of course, gun rights folks don't agree that the gun control folks are right that it will, but that is sort of besides the point.

Or do you also want to be locked up with anti-abortion crusaders for the same reason?


Yeah, you read the book, didn't you? DEAD CHILDREN DEAD CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Posts: 91,125
Frazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < CasselFrazod < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 08:11 AM   #18
notorious notorious is online now
I Lay Wood for a Living
 
notorious's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2005
Location: Who knows?
Casino cash: $9564
Whenever a group that has an agenda screams "The Children" they are just using them as a tool.
Posts: 30,980
notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.notorious is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 08:13 AM   #19
stevieray stevieray is offline
Ring of Fire
 
stevieray's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by notorious View Post
Whenever a group that has an agenda screams "The Children" they are just using them as a tool.
ya, they love to play the psuedo emotional card with 50 million hash marks on the back...
Posts: 36,202
stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 09:46 AM   #20
Pawnmower Pawnmower is online now
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11305
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneWolf View Post
Both sides do this and often over the same incident.

Sandy Hook was a prime example. Anti-gun "if only we could ban assault type weapons and high capacity magazines". Pro-gun "if only there would have been somebody armed at the school".
On sandy hook, the NRA was refusing to make ANY statement, for quite a while after the incident..

The anti-gun crowd was at it immediately, from what I saw.

I do agree, the shit comes from both sides.....but you never hear one thing from the anti-gun crowd about the daily gun murders in the inner city...Its only when a bunch of white kids die then it becomes a problem.

ALso, in sandy hook , they failed to mention that the guns were obtained ILLEGALLY and no gun law wouldve prevented that...no amount of background checks can stop someone from stealing guns and using them to kill.
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 14,624
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 09:52 AM   #21
Pawnmower Pawnmower is online now
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
What if the cause is trying to prevent more dead children in the future?

If your cause is TRULY trying to prevent children from dying, then banning semi-auto rifles is ****ing retarded.

Knives and baseball bats kill more people than semi auto rifles.

I am pretty sure more people are killed by deer than semi auto rifles.

Drugs & Alcohol kills much more (like many times more) than semi auto rifles.

Car accidents are the worst of all.


Why don't we ban alcohol? Why dont we ban cars?

Because we realize that freedom and responsibility go together......

Semi auto rifles are really a tiny percent of the deaths, akin to tractor accidents or hitting a deer with a priius and dying....and yet everyone is so quick to want to ban them.
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 14,624
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 11:51 AM   #22
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod View Post


Yeah, you read the book, didn't you? DEAD CHILDREN DEAD CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!111

Nah, not really. I tend not to get involved in gun rights/control discussions much anymore. I kind of see both sides of the debate, and don't really feel passionately about it either way.

Obviously, many, MANY people here do, so I just grab the popcorn and let them fight it out.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,161
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 11:59 AM   #23
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawnmower View Post
If your cause is TRULY trying to prevent children from dying, then banning semi-auto rifles is ****ing retarded.

Knives and baseball bats kill more people than semi auto rifles.

I am pretty sure more people are killed by deer than semi auto rifles.

Drugs & Alcohol kills much more (like many times more) than semi auto rifles.

Car accidents are the worst of all.


Why don't we ban alcohol? Why dont we ban cars?

Because we realize that freedom and responsibility go together......

Semi auto rifles are really a tiny percent of the deaths, akin to tractor accidents or hitting a deer with a priius and dying....and yet everyone is so quick to want to ban them.

This will be my last post on the topic. As I said, I'm not really passionate about it.

Cars are absolutely necessary tools. DRugs are banned/controlled already, and alcohol -- we tried that once before. It didn't work out too well.

Knives are necessary tools, and bats are nothing more than blocks of wood in a certain shape. You can't ban wood.

And nobody, ever, commits mass murder on innocent people with those tools in just a few minutes. It's not even possible.

Part of the issue is that the U.S. has a much, much higher rate of gun-related homicides than any other advanced "first world" country. Why is that, and can anything be done to reduce that? Well, the other first world pretty much all have strict gun control laws. Of course, guns are baked into the American culture in a way that they aren't anywhere else, and just having more guns around means there will be more gun-related deaths -- even if only by accident. It doesn't take a genius to know that we have more vehicle-related deaths per capita than most countries for similar reasons -- we drive more and have more vehicles per capita.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,161
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 02:00 PM   #24
Pawnmower Pawnmower is online now
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
This will be my last post on the topic. As I said, I'm not really passionate about it.

Cars are absolutely necessary tools. DRugs are banned/controlled already, and alcohol -- we tried that once before. It didn't work out too well.

Knives are necessary tools, and bats are nothing more than blocks of wood in a certain shape. You can't ban wood.

And nobody, ever, commits mass murder on innocent people with those tools in just a few minutes. It's not even possible.
Umm

1) cars are not necessary, we COULD live without them

2) we don't have a right to have cars, it is a privilege

3) yes people commit mass murder with cars:

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.s...at_venice.html <-- just happened a week ago, only one dead so far but 12 people were struck i think

4) yes people commit mass murder with knives , so it is possible



The thing is, the semi auto rifle is a tool, JUST LIKE the things you mentioned.

The thing you dont seem to get is that we actually HAVE A RIGHT to possess arms for defense, unlike a car or drugs, or beer......ALcohol serves no purpose...

Someday I guarantee cars will be replaced by much safer means of transport in the future....(automated things like this:

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/0...plans-for.html )


But for right now, while politicians have armed guards, soldiers have arms, police have arms, bodyguards of CEO's have arms....the PEOPLE should also have arms.

Why anyone would argue to give up their rights to have BASIC (semi auto) defense weapons is mind boggling...especially when semi auto rifles are not even on the radar in terms of an actual problem.

Look up the statistics yourself.

MORE THAN DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ARE KILLED BY HANDS AND FEET THAN WITH RIFLES

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...-data-table-11

Double.

More people are killed with knives, clubs, bats etc than by rifles.

That is EVERY KIND of rifle put together.

To even argue that taking away semi auto rifles will do ONE THING to reduce crime in the USA is moronic, once you know the numbers.

Just take a look for 2 minutes.
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 14,624
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 05:33 AM   #25
rockymtnchief rockymtnchief is offline
Supporter
 
rockymtnchief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Crazys of Montana
Casino cash: $5840
__________________
Posts: 4,315
rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 06:10 AM   #26
Brainiac Brainiac is offline
Veteran
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lenexa, KS
Casino cash: $6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post

Part of the issue is that the U.S. has a much, much higher rate of gun-related homicides than any other advanced "first world" country. Why is that, and can anything be done to reduce that? Well, the other first world pretty much all have strict gun control laws. Of course, guns are baked into the American culture in a way that they aren't anywhere else, and just having more guns around means there will be more gun-related deaths -- even if only by accident. It doesn't take a genius to know that we have more vehicle-related deaths per capita than most countries for similar reasons -- we drive more and have more vehicles per capita.
Have you ever looked at the number of deaths by violent crime and where the USA ranks in that list?

I have. The answer is that the USA ranks pretty much right in the middle. Taking away guns doesn't decrease the murder rate. It simply changes the weapon from a gun to a knife, a club, or the perpetrator's bare hands. Killers are going to kill, regardless of whether or not they have a gun.

If you choose to base your statistics on murders BY GUN rather than just murders, then you are skewing the numbers to fit your argument. People who are murdered are just as dead if they are stabbed, strangled, or beaten to death. Basing the argument on the statistic of murders STRICTLY BY GUNS is just as dishonest as Pittsie's attempt to attack the entire health care industry because of a douchebag move by a single company (see the other thread).

And while it's true that it's much more difficult for a mass murderer to accomplish his goal without a gun, the fact is that mass murders are actually pretty rare, and a determined mass murderer can accomplish his goal in other ways. Just ask Timothy McVeigh.
Posts: 4,290
Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 06:30 AM   #27
rockymtnchief rockymtnchief is offline
Supporter
 
rockymtnchief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Crazys of Montana
Casino cash: $5840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
Have you ever looked at the number of deaths by violent crime and where the USA ranks in that list?

I have. The answer is that the USA ranks pretty much right in the middle. Taking away guns doesn't decrease the murder rate. It simply changes the weapon from a gun to a knife, a club, or the perpetrator's bare hands. Killers are going to kill, regardless of whether or not they have a gun.

If you choose to base your statistics on murders BY GUN rather than just murders, then you are skewing the numbers to fit your argument. People who are murdered are just as dead if they are stabbed, strangled, or beaten to death. Basing the argument on the statistic of murders STRICTLY BY GUNS is just as dishonest as Pittsie's attempt to attack the entire health care industry because of a douchebag move by a single company (see the other thread).

And while it's true that it's much more difficult for a mass murderer to accomplish his goal without a gun, the fact is that mass murders are actually pretty rare, and a determined mass murderer can accomplish his goal in other ways. Just ask Timothy McVeigh.


Take out the gang crimes and the US moves closer to the bottom. Politicians like gang violence. It keeps the gun numbers up so they have statistics to back their agenda.
__________________
Posts: 4,315
rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.rockymtnchief is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 09:24 AM   #28
2bikemike 2bikemike is offline
Born to Ride
 
2bikemike's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: El Cajon Calif.
Casino cash: $6043
Here is a good article by Massad Ayoob. It speaks to how the cops truly feel about gun control legislation. Its kind of long but worth the read.

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob142.html


Quote:
First, a word of explanation. The reason "gun control" is in quotes in the title and in this sentence is because, for a very long time, the prohibitionists have made it more about control of the general public than about controlling criminal misuse of lethal weapons. Of late, the prohibitionists have played their word-spin again, changing the name of their product to "firearms safety" and "firearms responsibility."

Um ... sorry. You'll have to look long and hard to find, among the ranks of the prohibitionists, anyone who has actually taught a firearms safety class. Since 1871, the leading firearms safety training entity in the United States and probably the world has been the National Rifle Association, an organization which has been venomously demonized by those who would now usurp all they've done to further the disarming of American citizens.
Quote:
Street reality

The media and the prohibitionists had told the public that America's police had wanted banning of semiautomatic rifles, and of magazines that held more than 10 cartridges; that had already failed in the Senate. Even background checks for transfer of firearms ownership had now failed? Shouldn't the cops have responded with an anguished chorus of "Boo"?

No.

Because these were the real cops, the trainers of the next generation of real street cops, and they knew the reality.

They knew that the sick monster who had slain 20 children and 6 adults in Newtown had murdered his own mother to steal the guns she had lawfully purchased in Connecticut, one of the nation's toughest "gun control" states, and that no background check could have stopped his evil depredation.

Many of the cops in that audience, myself included, had been the first responding officer to situations where innocent victims had saved themselves from deadly danger with defensive firearms ... the only reason they were still alive to talk to us when we got there. Every cop in that audience worked hard to be proactive, to prevent crime. But each also understood that in a nation of more than 300 million people, with only about 800,000 cops, law enforcement is really more reactive than proactive. Cops can't be everywhere. They can't predict where the most evil and violent criminals will strike. They can only respond as fast as they can when they "get the call."
Posts: 13,695
2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli2bikemike 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 12:30 PM   #29
Bewbies Bewbies is offline
Where's the flag ref?
 
Bewbies's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Casino cash: $5850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
It's really too bad the gun rights folks don't have a massive, well-funded, politically powerful, national organization with, no doubt, a huge budget for communications and public advocacy so they can carefully consider their message and how best to advance it in public debate...
We also have:
An old document
Reality
Facts
Posts: 6,515
Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Bewbies is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 01:05 PM   #30
WhiteWhale WhiteWhale is offline
Veteran
 
WhiteWhale's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Doo-Dah
Casino cash: $6387
I really wish people put this much effort into stopping the black market weapons trade.
Posts: 4,307
WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

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 On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.