Preemptive Action for Gun Rights

[divemaster5734]

This is a link that will take you to a gun right petition page.

It will automatically find your representatives in congress and senate, and send them your thoughts on taking away our gun rights.

You can either use the form text, or delete and use your own words.

I have found the generic text to be far too forgiving when communicating with the elected socialists from WA state.

If you don't want weekly emails be sure to un- check the box.

Remember, if you are too scared to stand up for your rights, how can you expect to keep them?

A lot of very honorable humans have given their lives to protect our freedoms, we are now at another very important point in American history.

The gun grabbers are working themselves up into a lather, if we don't let them know we won't put up with the BS, you can bet it will get shoved down our throats.

Please, don't wait until we are left only to whine about losing another essential freedom.

let them know know now, let there be no mistake, Americans demand to keep their 2nd amendment.

Petition

[Shabibilicious]

Do you think the petition will still be available after all the children have been laid to rest......or should I sign it now?

GO RV, then BV

[divemaster5734]

Do you think the petition will still be available after all the children have been laid to rest......or should I sign it now?

GO RV, then BV

I see, once we get rid of the guns we can outlaw forks for making all those people fat, and then outlaw pencils for making everyone look so dang stupid.

Then we can outlaw the word "bad", because it's sooo bad, and we don't want to offend anybody.

After than we can make a law there has to be a rainbow painted at every street corner so everyone can feel so "uber" good...

Oh, happy happy, joy joy.. I feel so wonderful I can just vomit....

Edited December 17, 2012 by divemaster5734

[dog53]

Do you think the petition will still be available after all the children have been laid to rest......or should I sign it now?

GO RV, then BV

Yes I would go ahead and sign it now. You cant make me feel guilty Shabs when I have done nothing wrong. I refuse to be treated like a criminal just cause I own guns.

[fastang1111]

Thank you for the link divemaster5734.

[Shabibilicious]

Yes I would go ahead and sign it now. You cant make me feel guilty Shabs when I have done nothing wrong. I refuse to be treated like a criminal just cause I own guns.

Nobody said anything about feeling guilty Dog. I'm not offended by dive's timing either.....it just feels a little early to me, that's all. There isn't one person on here that is going to give up their guns if they're outlawed anyways. Why do we continue to press the issue......in the hopes of staying on the right side of the law, I would suspect. I HAVE GUNS (EVERYBODY PLEASE READ....AND LET THAT SINK IN).....seems as if screaming is the only way to get peoples attention around here.

GO RV, then BV

Edited December 17, 2012 by Shabibilicious

[ginger21]

Thanks also Dive for the link and thanks also to dog53 we have done nothing wrong,

I would give my life to protect another.

[dog53]

Nobody said anything about feeling guilty Dog. I'm not offended by dive's timing either.....it just feels a little early to me, that's all. There isn't one person on here that is going to give up their guns if they're outlawed anyways. Why do we continue to press the issue......in the hopes of staying on the right side of the law, I would suspect. I HAVE GUNS (EVERYBODY PLEASE READ....AND LET THAT SINK IN).....seems as if screaming is the only way to get peoples attention around here.

GO RV, then BV

Roger that.

[Dinar Buddy]

The connecticut situation is not about the guns, but about a person that was unstable and possibly mentally unstable. This is a very sad time for all.

Interests facts:

An estimated 10,839 people in the United States died in drunk driving crashes last year, accounting for 32% of total traffic deaths. There might be 4 or 5 times more guns thans cars, yet the results a totally different. In every one of the instances is was people, not the guns or the cars...

[JREDinars]

We choose to live in a gun culture. Is there a positive correlation between the number of guns in a country and gun violence, sure. Of course! But here's the deal. How many millions of people acted responsively with their guns that day? I did. You did. It was 1 person. If we are going to have guns we are going to have to stomach the chance that this can happen. But it's rare in comparison to the number of guns we have. Ive saved my life with a gun. I didn't pull the trigger, but he retreated. We need to realize that with this right comes great responsibility and sometimes great tragedy. If we are going to be a country full of guns, then we have to accept the fact that these tragedies will occur. It is what it is. The odds are small of you or your child being involved in a mass shooting. Yesterday, in Pakistan, 17 women and children were blown up. There is violence everywhere. People will find a way to kill, guns or not. It's evil and/or mental illness that hits a breaking point. It's awful.

I can't even turn on the news or read the papers because I have a 6 year old and it breaks my heart. Listen very carefully to what O said in his speech last night. Make your decisions for your safety carefully. My husband has put a lot of people in prison, so there is a gun, well hidden, and not in reach of my child that I could grab if one of these people gets out and wants revenge. I've got that revenge-stop in my hand. Don't forget what great responsibility comes with the ownership of gun(s). God bless the little ones who are spending Christmas with Jesus, the Brave adults, first reponders, and their families. My prayers go out to all.

[reveldog]

just signed thx dive

[divemaster5734]

Nobody said anything about feeling guilty Dog. I'm not offended by dive's timing either.....it just feels a little early to me, that's all. There isn't one person on here that is going to give up their guns if they're outlawed anyways. Why do we continue to press the issue......in the hopes of staying on the right side of the law, I would suspect. I HAVE GUNS (EVERYBODY PLEASE READ....AND LET THAT SINK IN).....seems as if screaming is the only way to get peoples attention around here.

GO RV, then BV

I owe you an apology, I obviously mistook your comment.

Please forgive me.

That being said, don't think for one instant the progressives are "being honorable" by the silence, it is only the calm before the storm.

They are coordinating one of the biggest anti-gun propaganda movements America has ever seen.

O sounded the "call to arms" with his trite little speech yesterday, if we are not 100% committed to keeping our rights, we will lose them.

I have no doubt they are coordinating their efforts, believing now is the time.

The timing strikes me as almost too good to be true, what with the UN set to vote on the arms treaty next month.

The gun crimes have been getting progressively worse, until last week, a crime so heinous as to be unimaginable by normal people.

I am still having a tough time trying to wrap my mind around the reality of what happened.

I am sorry to sound callous, it is the exact opposite, as a parent losing one of my kids that early was a persistent nightmare that caused me to leave the LA area when we became pregnant with our first.

I think it would be impossible to understand the depth of the pain the parents are going through at this moment unless it was personally experienced.

You can be sure the videos of the grieving parents are being recorded as we speak, the impassioned cries for gun control being made by a person suffering from the loss is going to be icing on the cake to cap a leftists anti-gun speech.

If you want to see evil, look at the pictures of starving kids in Africa, then understand they are being put through that on purpose, because there's not enough profit in it for the 10 different different merchant cartels for them to bother with the millions of innocent victims.

If you want to see cruel just drive around a city, see the homeless and the foreclosed homes, there's no reason for all that except the government and bankers need to keep playing their games.

If you want to see hell, just sit around and do nothing, when the foreign troops take over policing and install martial law, you can thank the stinking progressives as you are led away to prison for refusing to give up your gun.

[dog53]

5 Points that Need to Be Raised During the National Debate on Gun Control

Well, here we are, several days after one of the most horrific school shootings in America’s history.

A 20-year-old gunman walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown CT and murdered 27 people, including 20 young children and seven women, before committing suicide.

An event like this is unthinkable. It epitomizes the word ‘tragedy.’ And both gun owners and gun-control activists agree that, as President Obama said in his speech last night before residents of that grief-stricken, New England town, “We can’t accept events like this as routine.”

All right, so, the question then becomes what do we do to reduce the likelihood that this happens again?

As we come together as a nation to answer this question, here are five points that must be raised during the debate:

An “Assault” Weapons Ban is not the Answer

A renewal of the Clinton-era “Assault” Weapons Ban (AWB) seems to be the solution (or part of the solution) that most gun control advocates are now pushing in the aftermath of Sandy Hook.

“I can tell you that [the president] is going to have a bill to lead on because…I’m going to introduce [it] in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House – a bill to ban assault weapons,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ on Sunday.

The bill would ban “assault” weapons and high capacity magazines (those that can hold more than ten rounds).

Though, has anyone bothered to ask himself/herself whether an AWB is really effective at thwarting crime or mass shootings?

Guns.com has pointed this out in the past, but here it is again (courtesy of wiki):

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the “assault weapon” ban and other gun control attempts, and found “insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.”

A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban “did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence” and noted “due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban … the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small.”

The United States Department of Justice National Institute of Justice found should the ban be renewed, its effects on gun violence would likely be small, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as “assault rifles” or “assault weapons”, are rarely used in gun crimes.

These are not the findings of the pro-gun community, but of government institutions and a nonprofit research organization. Before a new AWB is penned, lawmakers should examine these studies. If they do, they’ll recognize that an AWB is not a practical solution to the problem of gun violence (or mass shootings).

(A sociopath with a pistol can be just as deadly or as dangerous as one with a high-powered rifle, as Seung-Hui Cho proved in his attack on Virginia Tech, where he killed 32 people and wounded 17 with two common and widely-owned handguns).

As Concealed Carry Rises, Crime Decreases

Yes, correlation does not equal causation, but it’s difficult to deny the reality that as concealed carry rights have been expanded over the past two decades, crime (property crime, violent crime, and the homicide rate) has continued to decline.

In short, more guns and an expanding ‘gun culture’ are not creating more crime.

Concealed Carry Expansion ( see below)

Crime Rates: (see below)

Mental Health, NICS and Background Checks

Here is a place where gun owners and gun control activists can find some common ground.

Moving forward we need to review, in detail, the current system for identifying those who are deemed ‘mentally defective’ and who, as a result of that adjudication, are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms.

The following questions need to be addressed immediately: is the information on the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System completely up-to-date? Are courts at every level – local, state, federal – promptly reporting to the FBI info regarding the criminal and mental health status of offenders? Are there ways to streamline and improve the system?

In the particular case of Adam Lanza, a background check wouldn’t have made a difference. All the guns used in the shooting were legally registered to his mother, who was by all accounts an enthusiastic and responsible gun owner (Lanza murdered his mother before driving to Sandy Hook with at least three of her firearms).

But generally speaking, a revamped NICS system might help to improve public safety.

Tougher penalties for violent offenders

As Ted Nugent often says, “I don’t believe in repeat offenders, I believe in dead offenders.” Indeed.

But in lieu of dead offenders, we need to do a better job of (a) enforcing exiting laws that are deemed to be appropriately punitive and (, where needed, creating new laws that ‘throw the book’ at those who use firearms while committing crimes.

End of ‘Gun-Free’ zones

In every bank there’s an armed guard (or two or three, etc.). The reason? People rob banks.

Well, in America, deranged individuals target defenseless citizens who congregate in ‘gun-free’ zones (a movie theater in Aurora, a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, an elementary school in Newton, etc.).

When are we as a society going to realize that ‘gun-free’ creates environments and situations where people are utterly defenseless to these types of attacks?

In the gun community we often say, “Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.” On Sunday, during a Fox News telecast, Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) iterated this important point with respect to Dawn Hochsprung, the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School, who was killed when she confronted Lanza in an attempt to get him to stop shooting.

“I wish to God she had had an M4 [carbine rifle] in her office locked up and so when she heard gunshots… she takes his head off before he can hurt those kids,” Gohmert said

No one is saying that every teacher or administrator needs to carry, but there should be at least a few who are willing to take on this responsibility (if not teachers or administrators, then armed security personnel).

While having armed employees is no guarantee that something like this will never happen again (after all, people still rob banks), it will at least give students, faculty, and staff a fighting chance – which is much much more than they have right now.

Your thoughts?

[Bumper64]

[JREDinars]

5 Points that Need to Be Raised During the National Debate on Gun Control

Well, here we are, several days after one of the most horrific school shootings in America’s history.

A 20-year-old gunman walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown CT and murdered 27 people, including 20 young children and seven women, before committing suicide.

An event like this is unthinkable. It epitomizes the word ‘tragedy.’ And both gun owners and gun-control activists agree that, as President Obama said in his speech last night before residents of that grief-stricken, New England town, “We can’t accept events like this as routine.”

All right, so, the question then becomes what do we do to reduce the likelihood that this happens again?

As we come together as a nation to answer this question, here are five points that must be raised during the debate:

An “Assault” Weapons Ban is not the Answer

A renewal of the Clinton-era “Assault” Weapons Ban (AWB) seems to be the solution (or part of the solution) that most gun control advocates are now pushing in the aftermath of Sandy Hook.

“I can tell you that [the president] is going to have a bill to lead on because…I’m going to introduce [it] in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House – a bill to ban assault weapons,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ on Sunday.

The bill would ban “assault” weapons and high capacity magazines (those that can hold more than ten rounds).

Though, has anyone bothered to ask himself/herself whether an AWB is really effective at thwarting crime or mass shootings?

Guns.com has pointed this out in the past, but here it is again (courtesy of wiki):

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the “assault weapon” ban and other gun control attempts, and found “insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.”

A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban “did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence” and noted “due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban … the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small.”

The United States Department of Justice National Institute of Justice found should the ban be renewed, its effects on gun violence would likely be small, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as “assault rifles” or “assault weapons”, are rarely used in gun crimes.

These are not the findings of the pro-gun community, but of government institutions and a nonprofit research organization. Before a new AWB is penned, lawmakers should examine these studies. If they do, they’ll recognize that an AWB is not a practical solution to the problem of gun violence (or mass shootings).

(A sociopath with a pistol can be just as deadly or as dangerous as one with a high-powered rifle, as Seung-Hui Cho proved in his attack on Virginia Tech, where he killed 32 people and wounded 17 with two common and widely-owned handguns).

As Concealed Carry Rises, Crime Decreases

Yes, correlation does not equal causation, but it’s difficult to deny the reality that as concealed carry rights have been expanded over the past two decades, crime (property crime, violent crime, and the homicide rate) has continued to decline.

In short, more guns and an expanding ‘gun culture’ are not creating more crime.

Concealed Carry Expansion ( see below)

Crime Rates: (see below)

Mental Health, NICS and Background Checks

Here is a place where gun owners and gun control activists can find some common ground.

Moving forward we need to review, in detail, the current system for identifying those who are deemed ‘mentally defective’ and who, as a result of that adjudication, are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms.

The following questions need to be addressed immediately: is the information on the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System completely up-to-date? Are courts at every level – local, state, federal – promptly reporting to the FBI info regarding the criminal and mental health status of offenders? Are there ways to streamline and improve the system?

In the particular case of Adam Lanza, a background check wouldn’t have made a difference. All the guns used in the shooting were legally registered to his mother, who was by all accounts an enthusiastic and responsible gun owner (Lanza murdered his mother before driving to Sandy Hook with at least three of her firearms).

But generally speaking, a revamped NICS system might help to improve public safety.

Tougher penalties for violent offenders

As Ted Nugent often says, “I don’t believe in repeat offenders, I believe in dead offenders.” Indeed.

But in lieu of dead offenders, we need to do a better job of (a) enforcing exiting laws that are deemed to be appropriately punitive and (, where needed, creating new laws that ‘throw the book’ at those who use firearms while committing crimes.

End of ‘Gun-Free’ zones

In every bank there’s an armed guard (or two or three, etc.). The reason? People rob banks.

Well, in America, deranged individuals target defenseless citizens who congregate in ‘gun-free’ zones (a movie theater in Aurora, a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, an elementary school in Newton, etc.).

When are we as a society going to realize that ‘gun-free’ creates environments and situations where people are utterly defenseless to these types of attacks?

In the gun community we often say, “Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.” On Sunday, during a Fox News telecast, Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) iterated this important point with respect to Dawn Hochsprung, the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School, who was killed when she confronted Lanza in an attempt to get him to stop shooting.

“I wish to God she had had an M4 [carbine rifle] in her office locked up and so when she heard gunshots… she takes his head off before he can hurt those kids,” Gohmert said

No one is saying that every teacher or administrator needs to carry, but there should be at least a few who are willing to take on this responsibility (if not teachers or administrators, then armed security personnel).

While having armed employees is no guarantee that something like this will never happen again (after all, people still rob banks), it will at least give students, faculty, and staff a fighting chance – which is much much more than they have right now.

Your thoughts?

My thoughts exactly, (see above), if the teachers had guns, when the shots rang out, protocol of locking the children In the room would have been followed by every trained teacher carefully entering the fire-zone-- and then you're looking at 1 gunman whom may kill a few but an overwhelming number of armed adults ready to shoot to kill to defend their kids, they spend everyday with. I don't know this is the answer....my husband has fired thousands of rounds and to get a license it only takes 50 shots. So maybe they are more highly trained? He asked me if I could see my mom, (a 1st grade teacher) packing and taking out a gunman...I said your damned right she would. She would lay down her life for her kids. But taken the amount of overwhelming fire power, on the other side, or the mere knowledge of, it could be a deterrent. I don't know the answer. Just thinking that if a gunman knew he'd be met with critical fire-power...he might think twice or else, end up dead in the hallway. Fewer casualties for sure.

[Rayzur]

Thanks Dive....

And oh groannnnnn... Feinstein has been singing this song for the past 2 decades and since Jesus was a baby... I would have bet a year's salary she would jump on this as soon as it was politically correct to do so.... She is definitely the canary in the mine on this issue...

[willy1der]

Thanks Dive....

And oh groannnnnn... Feinstein has been singing this song for the past 2 decades and since Jesus was a baby... I would have bet a year's salary she would jump on this as soon as it was politically correct to do so.... She is definitely the canary in the mine on this issue...

Thats a great way to explain her rayzur, (Ms Feinstein). It's really sad that none of our politicians do let a crisis go to waste. The children killed has some of these politicians rubbing their hands hoping this may be the time they can get the people to go along with them. Why can't they give their agendas a rest and truly mourn and pray for these people. Whatever caused the young man to perform this act is beyond reasoning. But to jump up and pass laws to help prevent an act like this is wrong. What are the chances of making an emotional decision that has a good outcome, oh but we're going to sit down and have a discussion on what to do to prevent this from happening again. The chances of preventing an act like this from happening again is slim to none. We will never be able to make heads or tails out of this mans decision to do what he did.

btw... thanks dive for the link.

[Sentinel7]

Well Well would you look at this .

Only the Tea Party stands up to defend the Constitution of the United States of America

The rest of the Republican Fluff and Bluff party are busy selling us out on the fiscal cliff issue.

Some are even saying maybe it's time to have a conversation on the right to bear arms.

I think maybe it's time we have a National conversation on replacing the Republican Party with one who believes in the Constitution and defends it.

Signing these petitions and letters to our Representatives is only part of the battle we must get every one we can to help in the battle.

This maybe the calm before the storm but the anti gun people are not mourning they are in full glee mode.

They see a hole in the wall and they are fixing to try and breach the second amendment.

This is not the time to get defensive but a time to go on the offensive.

They will use slander,fear and intimidation to try and silence you .

Do not fall for these tactics we are morally and legally right so give them the (pluck yew )and stay on the offensive

No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise

[Saint]

Divemaster. Thanks for the link. Agree with all the comments. I have a concealed carry permit and believe me the statement of , " Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." holds the truth of the matter. I made a choice as a c c permit holder and with it comes a heavy sense of responsibility. If and when I have to draw my weapon it will not be used as a threat but as a preventive measure to save my life or the life of others around me.

[Bumper64]

Divemaster. Thanks for the link. Agree with all the comments. I have a concealed carry permit and believe me the statement of , " Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." holds the truth of the matter. I made a choice as a c c permit holder and with it comes a heavy sense of responsibility. If and when I have to draw my weapon it will not be used as a threat but as a preventive measure to save my life or the life of others around me.

+++++5

Well said!!

[Shabibilicious]

Since I am on a neg roll anyways......I might as well ask this question. As a deer hunter, in my state (YES....I OWN GUNS), it is unlawful to carry a shotgun that holds more than 3 shells. Why??

GO RV, then BV

[sxsess]

Do you think the petition will still be available after all the children have been laid to rest......or should I sign it now?

GO RV, then BV

The US only needs to address mental health issues in society. Guns have nothing to do with this tragedy.

[Shabibilicious]

The US only needs to address mental health issues in society. Guns have nothing to do with this tragedy.

I wholeheartedly agree with the mental health problems in this country........However, make no mistake, those bullets didn't come out of his index finger.

GO RV, then BV

[sandraed1963]

[dog53]

Since I am on a neg roll anyways......I might as well ask this question. As a deer hunter, in my state (YES....I OWN GUNS), it is unlawful to carry a shotgun that holds more than 3 shells. Why??

GO RV, then BV

In my state your allowed 6 shells for deer Rifle or shotgun. But if you are hunting for migratory birds you are only allowed 3 shells.

Why ? Well what I was taught is it make a better sportsmen and shot out of you. If you only have 3 shells to work with you are more likely to make the shots count. Thus insuring a clean humane Kill.