Gun control groups to target NRA

| February 16, 2018 | 275 Comments

According to the Associated Press gun grabbers are working over time to raise money in order to target legislators who don’t share their agenda. Shannon Watts, who recently said military personnel are white supremacists, says that “many of our lawmakers have failed us, but that’s why we have elections.” The Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety says that the received $800,000 in unsolicited donations;

Everytown for Gun Safety says it has received $800,000 in unsolicited donations since the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. It calls it a precursor for midterm elections in 2018, which it hopes will turn the tide in gun politics.

John Feinblatt, president of the Everytown group, says “it’s time to elect leaders who will finally act to save lives from gun violence.”

The five-point action plan includes pledging to vote according to candidates’ positions on gun safety, letting leaders know the money they’ve taken from the National Rifle Association will determine one’s vote, registering friends to vote, getting candidates to state their conditions on the record, and finally, running for office to become a champion for sensible gun laws.

Yeah, good luck with that. The last election turned on a few issues, one of them was gun control. The gun-grabbers are promoting fake news. They claim that there were 18 school shootings this year – there have been three. Their number includes one incident where someone shot a BB gun at a school bus. Americans don’t like being lied to, you’d have thought that the 2016 election would have taught the other side that lesson.

According to USAToday, some guy name Jimmy Kimmel addressed the President from his stage;

“Tell your buddies in Congress, tell Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and Marco Rubio — all the family men who care so much about their communities — that what we need are laws, real laws that do everything possible to keep assault rifles out of the hands of people who are going to shoot our kids,” Kimmel said. “Go on TV and tell them to do that.”

“That is a perfect example of the common sense you told us you were going to bring to the White House,” Kimmel continued. It’s time to bring it. We need it. Tell these congressmen and lobbyists who infest that swamp you said you were going to drain, force these allegedly Christian men and women who stuff their pockets with money from the NRA year after year after year to do something now. Not later, now.”

Yeah, the NRA isn’t the problem, it’s blivet-heads like you who want Congress to “do something now” and you don’t have any real suggestions, just platitudes about “something”. The NRA represents the interests of millions of Americans who can’t afford armed protection for them and their families like you. Stick to videos of women in bikinis on trampolines.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Comments (275)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. AW1Ed says:

    Same old same old. Jimmy Kimmel- who’s she?

  2. Carlton G. Long says:

    Well said, boss

  3. VTWoody says:

    I’m ready to just be done with the general population having access to magazine fed weapons. Yes, they’re fun to shoot, but its getting out of hand. As long as there is a removable mag, someone will find a loophole like the bullet button. Let people have to load each round like I do with my 30-30. Yes, handguns can be reloaded quickly, but handgun accuracy isn’t what an AR is in the long run. Sure they could carry 10 rifles that are loaded, but that’s going to slow you down. Enough is enough, we cant keep falling back on mental health as an excuse, because you cant tell when someones going to crack. The nutjobs that are enjoying the freedom to go grab an AR and waste as many kids as possible have ruined it for the rest of us, and I’m ok with getting rid of their ability to do it again.

    No, changing this wont help the thousands of people who live in fear each day in the cities that are plagued by violence, but thats another discussion. Chicago has had 250 shootings already, but thats a police issue.

    • Mason says:

      “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      The shitbag would have killed more with a double-barrel and a pouch full of buckshot. The reason he was so lethal was rooms full of helpless victims, with no one to defend them.

      He had -minutes- of uninterrupted time. Mag changes and capacity would not have mattered.

      Besides. The sort of monster that disobeys laws against murder is not going to obey one that says “no thirty round magazines”. To expect otherwise is irrational. And no law can make magazines go away. That would also be an irrational expectation.

      So no, we are not going to contemplate restricting what honest law abiding folks can do, imagining quite falsely it will do anything to restrain evil.

      • VTWoody says:

        Well lets make grenades, claymores, mortars, at-4’s and everything else in the world legal too. We already have a lot of other things that the common citizen cant buy. And you dont think there could have been time to react when he’s reloading a double barrel?

        Yes, criminals can always find a way to get what they want, but if the weapons arent readily available, it makes it so most of these idiots couldnt get them

        • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

          The school he attacked is a GUN FREE ZONE which guaranteed him a cornucopia of unarmed VICTIMS. Gun Control Laws are NOT the answer and I don’t care how much you bury your head in the sand singing “happy-happy-joy-joy” with visions of Smurfette getting cornholed by unicorns in your head, facts are facts.

        • AW1Ed says:

          I guess you missed the intent of the Founding Fathers when they penned the Second Amendment.

          • VTWoody says:

            No, I didnt miss it, but things evolve. We dont let anyone buy a SAW, do we?

            • Graybeard says:

              I’m all for letting folks buy a SAW.

              Most folks cannot afford to feed a SAW, but that is another matter.

              The fact that a SAW is not good for much more than keeping the other guys’ heads down is yet another matter.

              This “things evolve” bullcrap is just that. If one truly studies history one realizes that there has been no evolution of human nature in all of recorded history. Evil still seeks to destroy good, and the best good can do is be prepared to destroy evil when it arises.

              The Founding Fathers were wise enough to understand that – and enshrine the principles in our Constitution.

              This “things evolve” bullcrap is wishful thinking and unicorn farts. Grow up.

              • IDC SARC says:

                Statistically, the people that own fully automatic weapons in the US are some of the most law abiding citizens that you can find.

                • Graybeard says:

                  Texas Department of Public Safety keeps records on CHL/LTC holders and their crime rates.


                  • VTWoody says:

                    Well yes, you have to go through a lot of steps to get a fully automatic weapon. You dont think if you could buy them easily, that the Vegas shooter wouldnt of had one? No, he had a bunch of weapons instead.

                    • Mason says:

                      Anyone dedicated enough will find a way to get to their goal. He’d have had an easier time renting a U-Haul 40ft straight truck and driving it into the crowd. But he wanted the immortality the left and the media provide for any mass shooter.

                    • Ret_25X says:

                      VTWoody has demonstrated why you cannot argue a point with a leftist. No matter what is being discussed, it always “but what about”.

                      So let us play that game: First, the left told us that they would educate our kids. Then they told us that our boys were too rowdy and needed to behave like little girls. Then they insisted we medicate our boys with psychotropic drugs. Then some of the boys acted in ways entirely consistent with being on psychotropic drugs. No is surprised.

                      Most people are not surprised because there is a reason we call it dope. The leftist is not surprised because it the outcome they desired.

                      Oh, they prattle on about “the violence”, but the proof is in the eating, and every single leftist society has been a deathocracy. From Lenin to Mao to the US cities run for generations by lefties to the boys being drugged in schools it is all the same underlying desire to destroy.

                      The 1A and 2A are the last pieces they have not destroyed and they are hot to kill them too.

                      Which is why their disingenuous crap about gun control can be dismissed without rebuttal or emotion. Their tired, murderous ideology is unworthy actual intellectual arguments.

                      That said, the so called “moderates” or “independents” (which are terms for those who vote for the vile, violent and vexations villains, but don’t want to admit it) may be swayed, so here we are.

                    • SFC D says:

                      It only took one step for you to walk on your wanker.

                    • rgr769 says:

                      Given the income/wealth level of the Vegas Shooter and his lack of criminal history, he certainly could have afforded the cost of getting a Class III license, and likely could have qualified for one. So you have provided another false argument.

                    • Ex-PH2 says:

                      VTWoody, a fully-automatic weapon is a machine gun, which is NOT available to the American public in general. Try to catch up.

                    • Jonn Lilyea says:

                      VTWoody was/is an infantryman complete with CIB. We’ve met.

            • IDC SARC says:

              you can buy a semi-auto SAW

              ..and the founding fathers rented artillery and heavy weapons from private citizens for use in their endeavors, so thinking they would want only the current government to have powerful weapons of the modern era is not a certainty.

            • Mason says:

              The point of the founders, as with all of the Bill of Rights, is to protect the people against the government.

              The founders used their firearms to overthrow the monarchy. So the second amendment is to help protect the people from an oppressive government.

              Therefore, I think the original intent is for the people to be armed as well as the government. We as a society have decided to restrict access to things like tanks, high explosives, and nuclear weapons.

              How many “reasonable” restrictions do you give in to until you suddenly realize you are a disarmed populace ready to be enslaved by your masters? The only thing that keeps the government in check is the people.

              All of the victims in FL had a right to live. The government failed them. Time for the people (teachers, administrators, parents) to be able to do what the government cannot. Take up arms and defend our children. If concealed carry permit holders were allowed to carry in places like schools, you’d see armed citizens taking these lunatics down before they get their chance. Lots of stories of off duty police or armed citizens stopping active shooters.

            • rgr769 says:

              This is go-to for you fucking progtards, the false comparison: “If people can have magazine fed weapons, let’s give them mortars, hand grenades, and claymore mines.” You are moron and classic Kool-Aid drinker. How about we incarcerate everyone who has personality problems and needs mental health treatment. Makes just as much sense as your assertions. If we locked him and the Newtown shooter up, both these shootings could have been prevented.

              • VTWoody says:

                And what would have stopped the vegas shooter? Are you ok with bump stocks I assume?

                • Mason says:

                  Nobody who is trained or experienced on firearms would utilize a bump stock if they were going for accuracy. They’re a toy. A novelty. At best.

                • IDC SARC says:

                  How many crimes have been committed with a bump stock compared to how many have been sold over the last decade?

                  Bump firing doesn’t even need any modification to the weapon if you practice the technique.

                  • AW1Ed says:

                    “Bump firing doesn’t even need any modification to the weapon if you practice the technique”

                    As every kid with a 10/22 knows. All you need is a belt loop and a thumb.

                    • NHSparky says:

                      I’d mention this to my idiot Congresswoman, Carol Shea-porter, and she’d have a bill outlawing both on Monday.

                • Graybeard says:

                  No one but idiots believe bump stocks are good for anything but burning through a lot of ammo without any accuracy.

                  Yeah, I’m fine with bump stocks.

                  What would have stopped the Las Vegas shooter? Good question – there’s been a lot of secrecy around that incident after the initial reporting. Had he pinged anyone’s radar? There is not enough actionable intel that I’ve seen to know.
                  The kid in Florida had been reported to the FBI, to no avail, even though the nature of the report required some response. Is the Obama-tainted FBI too busy trying to find out if some whore pissed on DT to pay attention to little things like actionable threats to the lives and safety of children? It sure as Hell seems like it.

                  And there goes another of your unspoken premises: the government can take care of us. Anyone with sense can see, post Obama, that not only can’t the government care for us – they will actively scuttle any attempts for anyone to take care of themselves.

                  Why don’t you just go on and move to Venezuela?

            • DaveP. says:

              They do in my state. Or a Thompson, or a Grease Gun, or a Maxim. I had a buddy who had a post mounted on his Harley Trike for his M1919A1 (didn’t say he fired it from there, but it made carrying it to Knob Creek a lot more fun) and one of my biggest regrets is passing up on buying a transferable MAC-10 when I had the chance. Full auto weapons are perfectly legal in almost half the states in the union, as long as you jump through the NFA hoops. I used to work at a gun store that sold them.
              Care to guess how many legally owned full autos have ever been used in crimes?
              That’s right. Not even triple digits.
              Okay, one more strawman down.

        • Old Trooper says:

          VTWoody; you are making a false argument full of vitriol when you include weapons of mass destruction in an argument about guns. It lessens your argument and solves nothing.

          Maybe instead of looking at the tool used, you concentrate on the whys involving everyone and their dog reading his social media claims and calling it in, only to have the feds say “nothing to see here”. THAT’s where you should be concentrating your questions.

          I looked at my AR-15, yesterday, and watched it for over a half hour, waiting for it to jump up and march the half block down the street to the elementary school and start shooting it up. I was sorely disappointed that mine seems to be defective, because it never even flinched. Same with my 1911 .45, my 870 12 ga., my 30-30, .22, etc. Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than any of my firearms. Stop blaming the tool.

          • SFC D says:

            My AR, 12 GA, .357, and 1911 are all at home, unsupervised. As are MRS D’s 1911 and .38. Being the well trained and considerate weapons that they are, they’ve never once misbehaved and gone off on their own. And I’d rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy.

          • DaveP. says:

            Buncha years back there was a website called (IIRC) “Assault Weapons Watch”. Guy had a webcam pointed at his Beretta 92 (it had those evil 15-round magazines) and a time/date stamp in the corner of the view, so you could watch the ‘assault weapon’ as much as you wanted to make sure it wasn’t committing any crimes.

        • IDC SARC says:

          “Well lets make grenades, claymores, mortars, at-4’s and everything else in the world legal too.”

          Reading that made my wee tingle.

        • Eric (the OC tanker) says:

          “Congress shall make no law” means the same as “the right of the people…. shall not be infringed”.

        • The Old Maj says:

          Grenades, Claymores, AT-4s and mortar tubes are already legal (barring state laws, they are legal in my state). Requires a Title II tax stamp for each weapon and a tax stamp for each and every explosive round/ grenade so the numbers in private hands are pretty small.

          Mortar tubes are going to be the most popular. So long as the round is not explosive or otherwise a DD it does not require a stamp.

          Buying one is another story too, few manufacturers are going to sell you 1-2 or even a couple of cases of grenades. Plus with each one having to be registered the price per/ went up $200. Also you can’t just give one to a friend, that would be a felony.

          Every time this comes up the left ignores the real issue:

          Mental Health.

          The guy (almost always a guy) is nearly always mentally ill, pilled-up and not in any kind of real treatment program. Nobody that knew him is shocked because everyone knew he was batshit crazy for months/ years.

          I don’t care much for Trump but if he does something positive in the regard to mental health that would change my estimation of him.

      • JacktheJarhead says:

        If we just git rid of those EVIL AR-15s everything will be fine!!! Then someone gets killed with a pump shotgun. WE NEED TO BAN PUMP ACTION AREA WEAPONS!!!! Then someone uses a double barrel shotgun, where does it end.

        No, not getting mine, even if they ban them, NO! This is not a gu issue, this is a mental health issue. This jackass SAID he was going to do it.

        Nope, get rid of a certain type of gun starts us down that road. Once we get rid of that type, the rest will be easy!

        • VTWoody says:

          So youre ok with making it easy to go get a belt fed weapon? Should we remove the restrictions on those and let every walmart sell them?

          • Graybeard says:


            Next question.

          • The Al says:

            So I’m guessing you aren’t aware that it is legal to buy full-auto stuff provided it was manufactured pre-1986?

          • Combat Historian says:

            Belt-fed semi-auto firearms are already perfectly legal to sell and own like any other semi-auto firearms. They’re more expensive to own because the collector’s market for them is smaller that magazine-fed semi-autos, but they’re already perfectly legal under federal law…

          • Teddy996 says:

            Belt fed semiautomatic versions of full auto weapons are legally available in most states, VT. Nobody has them because they’re expensive to run and tedious to load.

            We’ve seen all this before, VT. First it’s semiautomatic rifles, then once they find out that the army and Marines use sniper rifles based on the popular model 700, they’ll come after those because no civilian needs a sniper rifle. It’s the same plays out of the same playbook every time with these authoritarians.

            A bunch of us just don’t want to play their game anymore.

            • Graybeard says:

              There you go, confusing him with fact and reason.



            • IDC SARC says:

              “First it’s semiautomatic rifles, then once they find out that the army and Marines use sniper rifles based on the popular model 700, they’ll come after those because no civilian needs a sniper rifle”

              I anyone hasn’t looked at Diane Feinstein’s list of weapons she wants banned, I urge you to do so. It’s probably easier to list the ones NOT on her list. And that is just her first round ban.

              • dusty1 says:

                It’s happened before in Australia, in the 1950’s ex-mil Lee-Enfield’s .303 were outlawed so everyone machined one thread off the barrel which made it a 7mm rimmed & legal, that law didn’t last long.
                Mass casualty shootings won’t stop until all semi auto AK47 & AR 15’s & plenty of other high capacity shotguns & pistols are removed from sale & private ownership and that’s not going to happen anytime soon in the U.S.A.
                It’s not that the government doesn’t trust you, it’s that when some nutter get hold of a military grade weapon/s that many innocent people die.
                Believe me, you can make do with a five shot bolt action rifle & double barrel shotgun if you have too.
                Funnily enough in the 1996 guns grab the Federal Australian & state governments were happy to have me carry a state government owned L1A1 (FN-FAL) but took & destroyed all my privately owned & individually licenced semi-auto’s & M500 12G

          • JacktheJarhead says:

            I think you need to understand gun laws. Semi-auto Belt feds are not illegal. They are also heavy and awkward. Are you talking about full-auto? Get with the program, those are NFA weapons. A lot more restritions. I have no problem with Belt-Feds. Love to have the Semi-auto 1919A4. And yes, I am ok with it. You apparently haven’t bought guns in awhile or ever.

            Why does Walmart always come up? Are you and all gun grabbers obsessed with that store? I haven’t been in one in awhile and they most sell ammo.

          • SFC D says:

            Woody, you’re like a Mattel doll that spews leftist anti-gun talking points when your string is pulled. Any original thoughts in there?

          • DaveP. says:

            Sure, why not. It’d be like the drum mags for AR’s and the like: there’d be an initial run on them as flavor of the week, then purchases would slow down as purchasers found out they were a lot less fun than they thought they were.
            You can buy a belt-fed semiauto right now, if you want to spend the money: FN makes a semi only M249alike, there’s a couple of companies either making or having made (finished production) of various belt-fed goodies from the other side of the Iron Curtain (brought in as parts kits, had the receiver replaced with a new build ATF approved semi-only receiver). Oddly enough, not a one of them has ever been used in a crime.
            Next strawman?

    • The Al says:

      Yeah, you don’t get to make the decision about what gun is best for me to use to defend my property, thank you very much. You may feel free to give up your rights, but I’ll keep my ARs, thank you.

    • SFC D says:

      Come and get my AR, VTW. Pack your lunch and bring a flashlight, it’s gonna be a long day and it’ll be dark when they carry you away.

      • VTWoody says:

        Well what moron comes into your house when a good rifle can reach out 300+ yards…

        • Lurker Curt says:

          Gee, with your comments I guessed you were AGAINST people owning guns…

          Fuckin dumbass.

          • VTWoody says:

            No, I’m all for people being able to defend themselves. I dont see why you need a weapon with 30 round mags. If someones coming with so much firepower that you need that, then youre way more important than I can imagine.

            • Lurker Curt says:

              I don’t believe there is a “Bill of Needs”. There is, however, a Bill of Rights. I have the right to own a mag-fed weapon, and by god they are fun to shoot. I’m not important, not at all, but if the need to defend comes up, I will.

            • OWB says:

              And what, in your estimation, is my need exactly? Yeah, that’s right, you have no way of knowing.

              Likewise, I have no way of knowing what type vehicle you need but it is safe to say that nobody really needs a red one, right?

            • Graybeard says:

              Come back to play when you give up any motor vehicle you have that will go faster than 30 mph, ‘K?

            • Graybeard says:

              “I dont see why you need a weapon with 30 round mags.”

              So, because you are ignorant, we have to give up our right to own a weapon with 30 round mags?

              Your ignorance is no justification for infringing upon my rights.

              Come back when you can think coherently.

            • 26Limabeans says:

              How many rounds can I have o great maker of rules?

            • AW1Ed says:

              For personal defense I’ll use what the professionals have. LEOs carry ARs with 30 round mags as patrol rifles, and they have back-up on call. I don’t, so I’ll be keeping my 30 round mags stuffed with 5.56 hollow points.

              • VTWoody says:

                Well the LEO’s have to carry what the might come against. If they werent legal, I bet they wouldnt have to arm up to fight them, becasue they wouldnt be on the street

                • Mason says:

                  Which is why the British police, historically unarmed and operating in a country with considerable restriction on private gun ownership, have started to have more and more armed officers?

                  One thing people with your arguments, VTWoody, always say is that they are ok with exemptions for military and law enforcement. Most all the posters here are military or vets (and a large chunk of them combat vets). Several of us have done law enforcement after our service. The people you are arguing with are the very ones you’d be ok with having these weapons you are so against.

                  • dusty1 says:

                    The British police are now dealing with many Islamic terrorist’s on their home soil which is why the are packing more & more MP5’s & stab vests.
                    I remember before mass Muslim immigration in the 1990’s here in OZ, I could buy KG’s of explosives with my blasting licence from a supplier’s magazine & keep what sticks of Powergel & detcord I didn’t use under my bed & the caps in a safe, now it requires approval from the Federal government & security agencies & takes weeks and plenty of paperwork.

                • SFC D says:

                  Does spinning around with your circular logic make you dizzy?

                • IDC SARC says:

                  “If they werent legal, I bet they wouldnt have to arm up to fight them, becasue they wouldnt be on the street”

                  Guess you missed the stastical evidence regarding the volume of criminals that target victims including LEOs with weapons they are already prohibited from possessing by law due to age, state/local ordinances or previous convictions.

                  yeah…they don’t follow the laws we already have.

                • Hondo says:

                  If they werent legal . . . . they wouldnt be on the street.

                  So that explains why the attackers at the Bataclan Theater in Paris in Nov 2015 didn’t have automatic weapons (AKMs). Right?

                  Wrong – they did (AKMs). And since they weren’t LE personnel, the attackers were prohibited under French law from having them. (Under French law, select-fire weapons like the AKM are category A firearms whose ownership is restricted to LE personnel.)

                  Gun laws are routinely ignored by those who choose to commit crimes.

                • Graybeard says:

                  Just like we succeeded so well in changing behavior by outlawing drugs and prostitution, huh VeryTermite-ridden-Woody?

                  Really, do you even pay attention to the real world, or do you spend all your time with your pet unicorn?

                • NHSparky says:

                  Woody, being from VT, you are aware of a little town across the CT River called Keene, NH?

                  Seems they got a grant to go out and get a Bearcat, which is an armored vehicle and basically a build your own tank?

                  Please, oh wise one, how many residents of Keene, hell, all of New Hampshire (and Vermont) have their own armored vehicles?

                  See, you’ve got it ass-backwards: I as a private citizen have the right, within my financial means, to possess any weapon which I might need to defend myself from a tyrannical and overreaching government.

            • Atkron says:

              Why do law enforcement need them? Are their lives more precious than mine or my family?

              In my state, according to our State Constitution and a subsequent law those able bodied citizens not in the uniformed militia are part of the unorganized militia. Meaning, we should be prepared to defend our state and country if it comes down to it. Why do I need a 30 round mag? because if the Chinese, Russians, or EU ever get a wild hair up their ass I’d like to be able to defend my home, my state, and my nation.

              Better to have the necessary equipment and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

              • Graybeard says:

                Or more realistically, “if the ragheads, Islamists, drug dealers, or a disciple of the Great Pedophile ever get a wild hair up their adz” I will be ready to blow them away at a nanosecond’s notice.

                Given the actions of the fascist ‘Antifa’ group, I will be ready to blow lot of them away at once if they bring their brown-shirt selves to attack me or mine.

            • Commissioner Wretched says:

              Who are you to decide what anybody else “needs”?

            • JacktheJarhead says:

              You don’t need! Who the hell are you to tell me what I need? If I want an AR to defend my property, I am going to have one. I will go through all the legal process to own one.

              Just admit you are Anti Second Amendment and you hate that pesky bill of rights. If you didn’t have those in the way, you and your ilk could kick our doors and execute us in the streets.

              Good Luck with that, Conrade.

              • VTWoody says:

                Not anti 2nd at all. Maybe I just practice enough with the weapons I have, that I dont need to fall back on 30 rounds to get done what much less will?

                • Mason says:

                  Nobody who has had to defend their life or the life of another with a firearm has ever thought that.

                  Wait until a guy hopped up on shrooms and PCP breaks into your house and is bashing your daughter’s face in. You’ll wish you had a 300 round drum magazine for whatever it is you want to fire at him.

                • Graybeard says:

                  Have you ever had to shoot multiple invaders hopped up on dope? If you bothered to look through the “feel-good” thread Jonn has so kindly been keeping for us, you will find several cases where there were two or more criminals involved.

                  30 rounds of JHP is not nearly enough, IMHO.

              • Ex-PH2 says:

                Meat cleavers – I have yet to use mine, because I never have had to chop anything that required it, but it came with the set of kitchen knives, so I’m keeping it.

            • Old Trooper says:

              It’s not called “The Bill of Needs”; it’s called “The Bill of Rights”.

              No one “needs” a car that goes over 80 mph. No one “needs more than one house. There are a lot of things that no one “needs”, but living in this country, where individual liberty is supposed to be paramount, it’s not up to you to determine what I want or need. You want to live like that? Buy an island and set up your own dictatorship.

            • SFC D says:

              Woody, a wise man once said “If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck”. If 30 round mags seem like overkill, fine, I’ll take a dozen.

            • Joseph Williams says:

              VTW, Two words = 2 home invaders. Joe

            • Nastyleg says:

              Wow BY, never have I heard someone talk so low of thier loved ones, strangers lives or their personal property that they believe that doesn’t warrent their maximum if not overwhelming effort/firepower to protect them/it.

              Then again as the wise man Greg Lewbowski once said that’s just like you’r opinion man.

        • Mason says:

          You’re making our point.

          Why would a coward looking to commit murder of a bunch of school children choose to go near a school with an armed guard or armed teachers when they could reach out and shoot him hundreds of feet away?

    • 3E9 says:

      Ban pistols, I’ll bet they are used to kill more people every year than anything else.

    • IDC SARC says:

      “I’m ready to just be done with the general population having access to magazine fed weapons.”

      and this is why our country has a more formal and valid process for decision making.

      • 11B-Mailclerk says:

        Forty -thousand- dead in 2017.

        By cars.

        Thus always the lie of the tyrant “You don’t -need- Liberty.”

        • The Other Whitey says:

          I’ve pulled enough drowned children out of swimming pools that I absolutely despise the goddamned things and won’t have one at my house for any reason. Pool drownings kill far more children every year than firearms, but nobody seems to think pools should be restricted.

          • RM3(SS) says:

            Been there done that TOW. Heartbreaking and still affects me to this day.

          • Jeff LPH 3, 63-66 says:

            TOW- Along with cars and hammers, machetes if you live in Miami. I subscribe to Incident Paging Network and the morning rush/evening rush has loads of traffic accidents and I only have Palm Beach County,Broward,Miami Dade and Indian River Counties. Fatalities every day from these MVA’S. So one can imagine the rest of the State of Florida not counting the rest of the country.

      • Joseph Williams says:

        IDC SARC Do they know a good number of CZ bolt action rifles use a 5 round mags . Yes it is detactable. JOE

        • IDC SARC says:


          I’m not sure why you’re asking or if you understood the context of my comment.

          My comment was implying that there are many people in this country with detailed factual knowledge of cause and effect, that they also participate in formulating the laws of our society rather than simply “having a feeling” and producing laws from that feeling without consideration of its validity or consequences.

    • Commissioner Wretched says:

      That idea is just another “feel-good” response that isn’t actually going to do one blessed bit of good.

      You’re smarter than that, VTW.

    • The Other Whitey says:

      Guess what, Woody: if I was to go bugfuck nuts and decide to murder a ton of people for no good reason (which I won’t), I could kill a lot more people a lot faster with my Ford F-150 than with an AR or AK. I could also kill more by mixing a few household chemicals with some Hone Depot hardware.

      Stop saying that I have to pay the price for shit I didn’t do that could have been prevented through multiple other means.

    • Jeff LPH 3, 63-66 says:

      Hey VTWoody- I guess you do not get why the 2nd A was put into the Constitution. The idea was that as long as there was a standing Army, the people could be armed. This goes back to the King James II era in old England where his opponents were disarmed and his supporters were armed. How does one go against an out of control Army with a one shot rifle.

    • Nicki says:

      Well… There it is. The most retarded thing I’ve read all day. I seriously thought… hoped… prayed to the Great Pumpkin that you were being sarcastic, but apparently you were just being dumb.

      Putting aside the Founders’ intent (read Federalist 28) for including the Second Amendment in the BOR, semi-auto rifles like the AR are used in tiny percentage of crimes – a little over 1 percent. In 1994, BEFORE the Federal “assault weapons ban,” you were 11 times more likely to be beaten to death than to be killed by an “assault weapon.” Most guns used in criminal activity are handguns, and the vast majority are ALREADY obtained illegally.

      Meanwhile, they’re used in defense cases, with the latest being just a few days ago in North Carolina. One of the guys who stopped that asshole in Texas used his own AR. A kid used one belonging to his father to defend his sister in a home invasion last year, and those are just a few off the top of my head.

      And while YOU may be OK with handing over your rights, you certainly don’t speak for the rest of us.

      Every time some shit canoe uses a rifle to commit a crime, the rest of us have to get punished for it. Fuck that.

      No. Eat a bag of dicks.

    • dusty1 says:

      Strangely enough in Australia you can still own a high capacity mag lever action rifle or lever shotgun up to 5 rounds, the Liberal / National party didn’t want to upset the country voter base too much in the 1996 gun grab.
      It didn’t work & now We have the Shooters, Fishers & Farmers party to vote for among other sensible pro-gun rights parties.

    • NormanS says:

      What would you do about stripper clip-fed bolt action rifles?

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      So you believe we can “ban magazines” and men are no longer mass killers?


      You -want- them to go the IED route? And -increase- the body count to -hundreds- at a time?

      Because -that- is what your method yields.

      One can fight and defeat a rifle armed indoors spree-killer with a pocket pistol. They want to see your terrified face, to speak to you. They will be -close-, out of arms reach, but same room close.

      How the frack do you fight and defeat a -bomb-? You don’t. Kids ain’t in classroom MRAPS. They just -die-, shredded.

      So “ban magazines!” Right! They won’t dare switch to common fertilizer and other common stuff!

      You never said how you would magically disintegrate all the existing magazines. Absent that, a ban is kinda pointless.

      What? Murderers would obey a ban? Really? They won’t buy stolen cop stuff from the local druggie types? Or up-gun to bombs?

      How about we remove the insane rules of engagement that prohibit school staff from shooting back?

      How about we actually institutionalize lunatics who demonstrate to a court they are bughouse nuts + dangerous?

      And thus not pick an unwinnable fight with something like 80+ million innocent people. Most of them won’t obey. Some of them will -fight-.

    • Bill R. says:

      Neither you nor the government gets to decide what guns I purchase. None of my guns have ever been pointed at another human being, much less fired at one. And they won’t be unless me or someone I care about is threatened. The Second Amendment is not a Bill of Needs. If you do not wish to own a certain weapon, you are free to not do so. But it is not for you to decide what I can own.

    • Fyrfighter says:

      There’s over 12 million privately owned AR variants in the US… if 12 of them are used in criminal acts each year, that means it’s one in a million…. so yeah, lets hold the other 11,999,988 owners of AR’s responsible for those acts…. do you support all totalitarian govts with such laws, or are you just that incapable of logic??

  4. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    Ghouls, dancing in the blood of innocents.

    Fools, engaging in wish-thinking.

    All in the name of a greater Progressive tyranny.

    “See! Liberty is actually -bad-! We have to do something about it, now!”

  5. Mason says:

    Kimmel is a moron, a shill, and a hack. I’m sick of seeing him literally crying on TV.

    Most Americans can see through the liberal BS about blaming the guns instead of the perpetrator. The dems have been on the “guns are bad” bandwagon for decades and it has done them no good.

  6. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    FUCK. THEM. Like a former CO once said, “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”, lefties enjoy getting any attention they can while screeching and being part of whatever problem they can.

    Gun Control Laws and the politicians that pass them do little more than aid, abet and embolden violent criminals by assuring them via legislation that law-abiding people will be conveniently unarmed VICTIMS. If Gun Control Laws were the solution pols claim them to be then places like Chicago, LA, NJ and Mexico would be crime-free Utopias!

  7. Mike Kozlowski says:

    …. Sadly, we know what the ‘something’ they want to discuss is – the best case scenario is mandatory registration, and the worst is flat-out banning and confiscation, which I suspect more than a few people would have already tried if it wasn’t for that pesky Constitution.

  8. SFC D says:

    I’m a fairly well educated man, but I need someone to explain to me just how the NRA promotes school shootings and gun violence. I’ve been a member for 10 years, and I don’t recall ever seeing anything like that in any NRA publication. Is there a secret society within the NRA that I’m not cool enough to join? Is there a secret handshake and decoder ring?

  9. IDC SARC says:

    Target the NRA? You’re taking on a lot of citizens with a lot of whoop ass.

    Bitches…bring it!

  10. radar says:

    Molon labe, assholes. Take your best shot.

  11. JimV says:

    Did the weapon go off by itself or was it the psychopath pulling the trigger?

  12. OWB says:

    To everyone who is wringing their hands today about “doing something:”

    What is the leading cause of deaths among children in the US?

    If communicable diseases is the leading cause of children dying, maybe we should close all public schools. That would solve the problem, right?

    If vehicle accidents is the leading cause of children dying, we should make automobiles illegal, right? Besides, nobody really needs a red car.

    Both would solve the problem. Easy peasy. Both solutions completely avoid the reality that millions of children did not die in spite of being exposed to public schools and red cars last year.

    Until you hand wringing fools can tell me how to address the numbers of children dying from preventable causes which account for many times more deaths each year than do firearms, don’t expect to be taken seriously. You obviously have an agenda which has nothing to do with the safety and lives of children.

  13. CPT11A says:

    School shootings get a lot of attention because, for the most part, that’s where upper class white kids get shot. If you really want to address gun violence, try to address the slaughter that happens in our inner cities every day.

    Drug pushing while in possession of a firearm? You’re definitely bad news- 20 years, minimum!

    Gang membership with a gun? You’re gone ‘til through the end of the Donald Trump administration. Junior, that is.

    Possession of a gun that was not legally purchased, or straw bought? Or helping straw sales, for that matter? Buh-bye.

    A repeat offender? Three strikes and you’re out. Forever.

    Of course, leftists would cry foul that this disproportionately affects black people, ignoring the fact that it also disproportionately HELPS black people, of course.

    As far as the attempt to curtail my gun ownership, all of which were bought legally and stored securely in a vault, and none of which have ever nor will ever harm an innocent person, the answer is no. It will always be no.

    • Atkron says:

      Florida used to have a 10-20-Life law similar to what you just described. I thought it was a wonderful law.

      10 years for pulling a gun
      20 years firing a gun
      25 to life for shooting someone

      It was repealed a couple of years ago.

      • rgr769 says:

        The progtards likely didn’t like their future Demonrat voters being locked up for all those years. There is now a legislative move afoot to give them back their voting rights.

  14. Atkron says:

    They aren’t attacking the NRA. The NRA is just the smokescreen. They are really attacking our Constitutional Rights.

    I would much rather live under dangerous freedom, than to live under tyranny disguised as safety.

    • Commissioner Wretched says:

      You and a lot of other people.

      Including me.

    • FatCircles0311 says:

      The Left was never a fan of civil rights or the US Constitituion. It’s pretty ridiculous how they’ve been constantly screeching about how illegal aliens have constitution rights when they murder citizens, but then next breath convict all Americans and try to deny them their most explicit constitutional right, which specifically states shall not be infringed.

      I fucking hate liberals. They are phonies and domestic enemies.

      • Graybeard says:

        They are Socialist tyrants. They hate freedom, simpliciter.

      • UpNorth says:

        The liberals will shut down the government, on behalf of illegal aliens, to the detriment of American citizens. Nobody on the left cares if the military doesn’t get paid or if John and Jane Q. Citizen don’t get their Social Security payment, but they’ll go apeshit if Juan and Juanita have to go home.

    • Eric (the OC tanker) says:

      You DO NOT have ‘Constitutional rights’. You have Constitutionally protected rights.

  15. Jonp says:

    Hey, Jimmy. We would love to pass laws to keep guns out of the hands of the truely mentally ill but everytime Repubs try the ACLU sues them and Acitivest Progressive Judges overturn the laws

  16. Jonn Lilyea says:

    The FBI admits that they dropped the ball;

    On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

    Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

    We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

  17. Perry Gaskill says:

    It’s interesting how a lot of NGOs now have gone with disingenuous branding. Everytown for Gun Safety sounds so benign and cuddly. I’d imagine if they called it 2nd Amendment Sodomites or Lady Liberty Squeakhole Dorkers it would have a more negative impact on fund raising…

    • OWB says:

      That’s the mayor’s association, right? If so, interesting that you would bring that up. Heard a story recently about a mayor who was part of this group. Then the group funded an opponent for him in the next election. Apparently that confused him, and caused him to leave the group.

    • DaveP. says:

      Back around 2001, George Stepanopolous produced a white paper on why Gore lost in 2000. One of the big things he pointed out was that Gore lost at lest 4 states by a smaller margin than the number of registered NRA members in each state.
      Now, a smart man would have used this as evidence to say, “Gee- maybe we had better tell Chuck Schumer to go suck a duck, because it looks like all that we’ll-take-your-guns stuff is a total vote loser.”
      What George really said in his white paper was, “People don’t want to vote for gun control- so let’s change what we call it.” He actually suggested using phrases like “gun safety” and “common sense”. Note that in no place did he ever suggest NOT pushing a gun control agenda, just changing what it was named.
      So when I see someone claiming they’re in favor of “common sense” “gun safety” “for the children”, I remember that white paper.

      • 26Limabeans says:

        I recall the NRA stating they could swing any election by 1 to two percentage points. I suspect it is higher. Much higher.

      • Casey says:

        They’ve changed “global warming” to “climate change” and “illegal alien” to “undocumented worker” using the same logic.

        It makes a certain kind of sense. If you change the words people use to discuss a topic, you can in theory change their thinking as well. Hence they stop thinking of illegals as criminals since they’re merely “undocumented.”

    • rgr769 says:

      “Gun control” has been replaced in the Prog Newspeak dictionary with “gun safety.” What they want to do to us is all there in Orwell’s “1984.” If anyone is too lazy to read the book, watch the movie.

  18. Roh-Dog says:

    Does anyone know the average age of an NRA member?
    I did indoor bullseye over the winter one year, if someone wasn’t a grandparent they were a great-grandparent, at 35ish, I was the ‘fresh meat’, FFS.
    These antigun fools have no knowledge of history; 1968, 1986, 1994… WE, THE FREE GUN OWNERS OF THESE UNITED STATES HAVE MADE CONCESSIONS!!!
    Michael Savage has made some warnings of what the Socialist/Progressive/Libtard-Left is trying to do. God, I hope he’s wrong.

    • Graybeard says:

      Maybe I need to make a savings plan to buy all my grandchildren NRA Life Memberships?

      Really cannot afford that, unfortunately, so we are teaching them to shoot safely and accurately.

      • Roh-Dog says:

        Sometimes that’s the best you can do. My personal motive is to pay the life membership at some point, but for now I’m more then happy to send them $35 a year (on top of ILA, PAC donations). We MUST keep their coffers full. I don’t care who’s doing the fighting for our rights; NSSF, GOA, NRA, etc. but the fight IS on, and someone has to pay for it.
        Do what you can, when you can.

        • Fyrfighter says:

          If you’re a current NRA member, get on their website, they have a deal going until the first week of March, i believe a Life Membership is $250, and payable in monthly installments..

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      It is very hard to run the barb-wire boxcar railroad if the untermensh shoot all the Einsqtzgruppen.

  19. FatCircles0311 says:

    17 murdered is nothing when governments obtain a monopoly on violence by disarmament. If people want to complain about violence precursors there is no better precursor to mass slaughter than the government taking away citizen’s ability to resist.

    hahah resist. Another Liberal hypocrisy exposed.

    Insufferable liberal cunts, my rights aren’t up for debate. You refuse to deport a couple of million foreigners but want to take a shit all over the US Constitution and remove civil rights of Americans? Bring it, scum.

    • Roh-Dog says:

      Are we the ‘crazed right-wingers’ we’ve been warned about?

    • The Other Whitey says:

      “Insufferable liberal cunts, my rights aren’t up for debate. You refuse to deport a couple of million foreigners but want to take a shit all over the US Constitution and remove civil rights of Americans?”

      That’s about the size of it, I’d say. I can’t fathom the kind of mental contortions necessary to allow their crap to make sense.

    • CPT11A says:

      GREAT point.

      I’d also bring leftist fears about Big Business into it. They always freak out about how corporations are going to kill people via climate change, which will totally drown the twelve inhabitants of Tuvalu.

      Not a peep for the millions who have ACTUALLY been murdered and continue to be murdered by governments that want to control every aspect of people’s lives, down to their thoughts.

  20. Old Trooper says:

    Look; there are over 2000 gun laws on the books over the entire country. Got that? Over 2000. How many mass shootings have been stopped? After the “assault weapon ban” where even 30 round mags were banned; did it stop Columbine? Was an AR-15 with 30 rd. mags used at all at Columbine? Were 30 rd. mags used at all? That would be no on all counts.

    Morons like Kimmel start bawling about needing just one more gun law and that will do the trick. No it won’t. What was used in Nice, France? NYC? If there’s a will, there’s a way. Take one tool away, they will use another. Anti-gunners think that by removing the tool, you will remove the danger. More people die of doctors fucking up each year than die from “assault rifles”. Should we ban doctors? Knee jerk panty wetting isn’t going to solve the problem. Freedom and liberty come with risks. I will take my chances and choose liberty.

    • Graybeard says:

      IMHO, Old Trooper, they don’t really care about removing the danger. That is the cover story.

      They want control.

      Total, absolute, and without means for us to oppose their control.

      That is the only explanation I’ve found that makes sense.

      • UpNorth says:

        “Total, absolute, and without means for us to oppose their control”. Boom!!!!! That’s all this is about, total control over those they hate. No means to resist is just one short step away from boxcars and re-education camps.

    • David says:

      That’s more correctly 22,000 local, state, and federal ordinances.

  21. Hondo says:

    Gun control: it’s not actually about “guns”. Rather, it’s about “control”.

    Complete, total control. Over every aspect of your life.

    The problem with that is it allows those in charge unlimited power. And the late President Gerald Ford perhaps said it best: “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.”

    I can’t speak for everyone, but I for one have no desire to live under such a government. I’ll take the occasional risk that comes with living in a free society over the “security” of living in a police state – forever looking over your shoulder, and wondering if today is the day when the 2AM knock on the door by the secret police will occur.

    • Lurker Curt says:

      I am so thankful for thoughtful and eloquent comments like these, Hondo. Thanks, seriously. Mine are always a bit…angrier.

      What Hondo said!

    • Graybeard says:

      I have an aunt who lived in Nazi Germany.
      I’ve had friends who lived under tyrannical governments.
      I’ve seen what has happened in Mexico and Venezuela – two countries I have loved.

      I will take the uncertainties of freedom, and the chances it entail, any day of the week.

    • UpNorth says:

      A captain at the department I worked for posted something interesting a day after the school shooting in Parkland. The take-away from it was that confiscation won’t work, because, if passed, half of the department would resign as soon as they were ordered to begin confiscating firearms and the remaining street cops would quit right after citizens started shooting the confiscators. I think he’s correct, I certainly hope he is.

    • NHSparky says:

      “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

  22. Atkron says:

    You know who else wasn’t a fan of the 2nd Amendment?

    John Adams…can you believe that?

    His reason? He didn’t think anyone would be dumb enough to try and ban firearms after what they just went through a few years prior.

    It’s a good thing the rest of the Founding Fathers ensured it was in the Bill of Rights.

  23. Martinjmpr says:

    The irony of blaming the NRA and trying to “get” the NRA is that the gun controllers are, in many ways, trying to swing a sword at a puff of smoke.

    The NRA isn’t the CAUSE of America’s high percentage of gun ownership, the NRA is the RESULT of America’s high percentage of gun ownership.

    In fact, the NRA members – last time I checked I think it was ~ 5 million – probably comprise less than 10% of all the people in the US who own guns.

    IOW, if the NRA disappeared tomorrow, another organization would take its place. The NRA isn’t powerful because it has some kind of supernatural mind controlling powers over the American people, the NRA is powerful because it represents the actual interests of a huge chunk of the American people.

    To sum up, from a gun controllers perspective, the NRA isn’t the real source of the “problem.” The “problem” for them is that tens of millions of American gun owners are exercising their constitutional rights to vote, campaign, petition their representatives, etc.

    The NRA makes for a great “boogeyman” that the Left can hold up as a villain for purposes of demagoguery, but the real problem they have is that they wish 50+% of the American people would either just die or at least stop voting, because otherwise they’ll NEVER be able to achieve their political agenda.

    • Duane says:

      They go after the NRA because the media has told them they are the bad guys, spending “all those millions in lobbying”. They don’t bother to even give a peep about the big drug companies that spend Billions lining the pockets of Congress and the Senate. How many of the most recent shooters have been one one version of mind control drug or another? Why are they so quiet about that – isn’t mental health problems what is really behind this, not a tool, which is what any firearm really is?

  24. Ex-PH2 says:

    “Americans don’t like being lied to, you’d have thought that the 2016 election would have taught the other side that lesson.”

    Naw. The Other Side lives on that recently-discovered planet named ‘Denial of Reality’, where every day is a game show and everyone gets a participation trophy.

    The Other Side can’t afford the luxury of not lying their asses off. It would cost them the one thing they desire the most: Control of Everything, which they never had in the first place. They spend so much time lying to themselves that they have no idea what the truth may really be.

  25. Hack Stone says:

    Hack seems to recall a prominent California politician who received multiple accolades from the “common sense gun legislation” crowd who is now in federal prison for weapons smuggling. Maybe he can talk about that during his next monologue.

    • Perry Gaskill says:

      It wouldn’t surprise me if “Leland Yee” translates from original Mandarin as “Moonbat Nitwit.” He once wanted to make it illegal for shopkeepers to be rude to customers. He was also accused twice of solicitation for prostitution. Connect the dots…

  26. Hack Stone says:

    Republicans are (allegedly) in the pocket of the NRA, and it is outrageous. Planned Parenthood dumps millions into Democratic coffers, and not a peep.

  27. Haywire Angel says:

    This is something I asked a friend of mine who is an advocate of more restrictions: If we enforced the current laws we have on the books for enforcing who is allowed access, etc, then this would not be a problem. Why add to it with something local law enforcement may decide is too much of a hassle? Why not ask the tough questions of when and how do we consider a person mentally unstable enough? Where will that line be drawn? If they are that unstable as to not owning weapons, should they be able to live on their own? Can they pay their own bills? What if they are a parent? Should their children get taken away to keep them safe from someone so mentally unstable? Which mental illnessess will be on what side of the line? It’s ok for you to own weapons if you are diagnosed with “a”, but not if you are diagnosed with “b”.

    • OWB says:

      The left won that argument in the 70’s when they dumped all the crazies out on the street. Of course, they manipulated the courts into ordering it, but the result was a huge population of people incapable of taking care of themselves suddenly living on the streets. It was horrible, for the crazies and for those who had to pick up their bodies.

      It’s probably time to revisit the argument. Good luck with that. It didn’t go well last time.

      • Graybeard says:

        I remember that time.

        I also know that many of those mentally ill who were dumped on the streets by these “compassionate” [urk] liberals have wound up living under the bridges of towns.

        A lot (not all) of our homeless population are also in the same part of the Venn diagram of our mentally ill population.

        • OWB says:

          Most if not all of those poor people are probably now dead, but some of them were young enough then to reproduce. It was so sad.

          That was probably my first exposure to real life examples of just how horrendous liberalism was. Well, maybe not actual first, but first large scale example in a situation where I had to deal with it directly. It is impossible to hold anything but contempt for those who caused it and continue to bring pain and suffering to humans for no reason other than that they can.

      • Jeff LPH 3, 63-66 says:

        OWB- That was giraldo Riveras exposing the horrible stuff that went on at the Willowbrook mental institution in Staten Island NYC, and then all of the institutions were closed down instead of making them better.

        • OWB says:

          Can hardly speak to what happened in every part of the country, but the several with which I am most familiar were shut down by court order. Those would cover at least 2 if not 3 federal district courts. (Memory is fuzzy – it was 40 years ago!)

          Lest anyone misunderstand, I certainly do not advocate the mistreatment of mental patients. Of course not. However, throwing tens of thousands of them out on the street was much worse than the treatment most of them were getting inside their institutions.

  28. Docduracoat says:

    This shooting took place in a gun free zone
    Or as I like to call them “ unarmed victim zone”
    Why are there no school shootings in Israel?
    Because all the schools have fences and armed guards
    As a parent, I demand that my public school fire 2 administrators and hires 2 armed guards!

    • Graybeard says:

      Better yet, fire 50% of the administrators and staff, provide firearms training for the teachers, and if there is any money left over then hire some armed guards.

      I know that we see, from time to time, the exceptions to the rule but in my experience as a teacher and a long-time friend to many teachers, they usually love those children as if they were their own – occasionally better than the children’s biological parents do.
      Arm Mama and Papa Bear and see what happens when someone tries to hurt the cubs.

  29. nbcguy54ACTUAL says:

    I’m an NRA Life-Benefactor Member.

    Like I tell other wannabe gun grabbers:

    I’ll leave the light on.


    I feel for everyone effected by school shootings, but gun control is NOT the answer.
    Canada’s last major school shooting was in 1989,(by POS Marc Lepine) It led to some laughable ‘gun law stiffening’ that would never effect any criminal use. Such as how our mag capacity for centrefire cartridges(applies to semi auto guns only) is 5 for rifle mags and 10 pistol.( but you CAN use a 10 rnd pistol mag in a rifle, weird eh?)
    “Permanently and legally” means the mag is limited to 5rnds by a single pop rivet!!! Yes, one that can be drilled to create a 30rnd mag in about 45sec!! Useful law…

    • Roh-Dog says:

      The anti gunners crafting laws is slightly amusing. Like here in Connectican’t, no pistol grips or other ‘evil’ features yet one can buy a M1A or a Mini-14.
      The legislature made it mandatory to register so-called assault weapons or magazines capable of holding more than 10. The BEST they got was 50% compliance minting hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of new felons. -insert something here about the road to hell and good intentions-

  31. Rosalee Adams says:

    My answer to knot heads of the babbling mob is ‘Molon labe’
    I grew up around guns and none were locked up. Nobody shot any family or strangers
    All belonged to NRA.
    I have a membership in NRA and own a gun.

    Here in Orygun Portland tried to introduce ‘gun control’ like Chicago has. Then county sheriffs found out and stated that they would not enforce, other than what was already on the books. They cited 2nd. There were only 2 holdouts, Multnomah (putrid Portland) and Lane (dizzy Eugene) who stated ‘too busy enforcing the law to comment’.
    The bill died before it could get to the floor. NONE of the sheriffs who stated they would not enforce were recalled.

    If we lose the 2nd, the rest of our rights will fall quickly. It is the first order of business for any
    tyrant to disarm the people.
    Just ask the people in Germany in the ’30s
    A pox on them

  32. HMCS(FMF) ret says:

    I’ve has a long day and few days with not much sleep, so forgive me if this has been addressed…

    The Left is all about going after the NRA and taking guns away from law abiding citizens… it’s been their agenda for decades. Why isn’t someone or some group yelling about going after those that are responsible for ENFORCING the damn laws on the books and for their FAILURE to act on the numerous warning signs that the murder in FL showed for months, if not years? I just read that the FBI FAILED TO ACT on this… and the local sheriff’s dept. made 39 calls about the perp. WTF??? These groups are supposed to protect the public, and yet they failed to do so!

    It’s goddamn time to go after those that failed to do their jobs. The FBI director should resign, and those in the local office that knew about the perp should answer for their actions. Same for the local LEO’s , if they failed to do their jobs, and anyone else that knew that this the perp was a threat and failed to do something.

    It’s about ACCOUNTABILITY, damn it! If we don’t demand it, they we are going to have the 2A taken away from us by the Left…

  33. Jeff LPH 3, 63-66 says:

    The Chicago 1927 massacre put the kabash on civilians owning full auto weapons which at the time, one could purchase these over the counter. I believe it was the 1934 NFA that put the ban into effect. As my above post to VTWoody, the 2nd was put in so the populace could own firearms as long as the country had a standing Army. This was because the Founders did not want Govt. control over the people like it was back in England. At the time, The Brits had their Brown Bess muskets and the Colonists had the same until England stopped shipping them over here. So the Colonists made their own Flintlocks. So both sides were even in the small race. Now our Military has superior small arms than the populace has, But I do not know if most of the armed populace knows the history behind the 2nd A.

  34. Nicki says:

    For those bitching about how we have to do SOMETHING, I submit the following.

    In the past couple of days there have been TWO school mass murders stopped. One was a grandmother who paid attention to her vermin grandson’s behavior and turned him in.

    The other was in Vermont, where police actually did their fucking job and acted on reports of a credible threat.

    You want this shit to stop? Maybe if the fucking authorities did their jobs and didn’t drop the ball like the FBI did in this latest school shooting case, things would improve.

  35. MCPO NYC USN Ret. says:

    800,000 bucks can pay for a few good salaries, weapons and ammo to stand watch at vulnerable schools.

    Or better yet, to fund locals to build a JTF to review social media and vet credible threats.

    In NYC environs, this mug would have been snatched early. Social media monitoring and courage goes a long way.

    The ball has been dropped again by many.

    • 2/17 Air Cav says:

      I share your point. If the adults wanted to more fully protect the school kids, there would be armed security in every school, just for starters. There is no need to turn schools into prisons, of a sort, any more than courts and many other government buildings are prisons or armed camps. It’s sickeningly funny to think how many gov’t buildings have proper–and redundant–security, how many private companies and corporations do, too, and yet when it comes to schools, relatively few have any protection at all.

      • OWB says:

        How tough would it be to put a metal detector, for instance, at the main entry door?

        Of course, that would not solve the problem, but it is one simple thing that can be done RIGHT NOW that would help. Some schools already require see-through pack packs. That doesn’t solve it either, but that plus a lot of other small changes would each stop some miscreants while you get enough personnel trained to have a significant impact upon the situation.

  36. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    IMHO WE DO need to reform our Gun Laws. Each and every State, County and Municipality ought to have Gun Laws identical to those of Kennessaw, Georgia.

  37. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    The states own their education systems, at least on paper. In actuality, the states sign-on to most every Federal cockamamie, harebrained idea passed down to them by the Dept of Education in order to keep Federal funding. This is no secret and has been ongoing for decades. If a state wanted to do so, it could tell the Dept of Ed to go screw itself, but it would cost the state; so the 50 march together, creating what appears to be a centralized education system. I don’t like it, but I understand it. So, here’s my suggestion. No Federal funds for any state whose schools do not have armed security and other measures designed to deter or nullify would-be shooters. That’s it. Billions and billions are spent annually for so much school bullshit. Wouldn’t it be nice if the Feds actually did something constructive?

  38. Ex-PH2 says:

    It’s not us conservative mopes that are the danger to anyone. It’s the lefties and “liberals” that are the biggest threat. We all know that. But this article from WUWT about an armed eco-terrorist attack is NOT about climate change. It’s about the real issue: control, and destroy anyone who disagrees with “US” (US meaning the left).

    Now, you can view Finnigan’s play as an attack on liberty and real freedom, or you can see it for what it really is, a warning to all of us to NOT take liberty, our rights and our freedoms for granted. Even though that may not have been his intention, it is the message he is conveying.

  39. NHSparky says:

    A couple of final thoughts:

    Charles Whitman killed 17 people with a bolt action rifle. Why didn’t we ban guns then?

    Obama and the Dems had a basically filibuster proof majority in both houses of Congress early in his first term. Why didn’t they pass “common sense gun legislation” then? (Although I believe I answered that question earlier.)

    • DaveP. says:

      One of the reasons Whitman didn’t get more is that a bunch of the students around the area ran to their dorm rooms, yanked their deer or squirrel rifles out from their closets and underneath their beds, and started shooting back. They didn’t hit him, but they kept him suppressed and helped reduce his chances to shoot.

  40. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    The are intended consequences and unintended consequences. There are also foreseeable consequences of both varieties. When a nutjob posts pics of himself posing with guns and knives, writes on social media that he will become a professional school shooter, is the first name on the lips of folks who know him as most likely to commit murder and is reported to the FBI out of concern that he will, in fact, commit murder, the consequence of doing nothing is unintended but clearly foreseeable.

    And while I’m at it, recall the Texas church shooter a short time ago. Turns out that the local sheriff’s dept dropped the ball on a rape case two years earlier. Would it have mattered? Perhaps. Perhaps not. We’ll never know.

  41. Fyrfighter says:

    I saw something a while back, it said, to paraphrase, “In the US, there’s 10’s of millions of Conservatives, who own 100’s of millions of firearms, and billions of rounds of ammo…if we were dangerous, you’d know it!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *