@ Average American Patriot: you know, I think I agree, too.

Just as all those restrictive and punitive gun laws ain’t doin’ any good to prevent shootings, DC’s restrictive law against displaying a high-capacity ammo clip (whether or not it’s attached to a gun — and whether or not it’s empty) didn’t stop David Gregory from breaking the law when he showed on on Meet The Press:

NBC Asked To Use High Capacity Clip For MTP, Was Denied

NBC News asked D.C. police for permission to use a high-capacity ammunition clip as a prop on Sunday’s “Meet the Press” show, a request District authorities said Wednesday they denied.

But host David Gregory appears to have used one anyway — and then displayed it on national television. Now D.C. police say they’re investigating whether the District’s gun laws were violated in the incident.
…
The District’s code says that “No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device” whether or not it is attached to a firearm.

After the show, people contacted D.C. police asking whether they would charge Gregory with a crime. A response from the department’s customer service section sent to a group called Patriot Perspective, and confirmed as accurate by a police spokeswoman, said “The Metropolitan Police Department is in receipt of your e-mail regarding David Gregory segment on ‘Meet the Press.’

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/12/26/nbc-asked-to-use-high-capicity-clip-was-denied/

DC’s ban on displaying hi-cap clips is just as worthless as a gun ban — because magazines don’t kill people; people kill people. :)

.

Now, it’s been quite awhile since I was in the military, but as I was reading through the comments a thought came to me.
I seem to remember that the Army had a LOT of gun laws. Both weapons and ammo were regulated much tighter than what the NRA has envisioned for the citizenry here, even in VN when not in direct combat zones. Maybe it’s changed? Are the bases here and throughout the world now the wild, wild west that these morons dream of? I’d be surprised if that were the case.
Anyway, just thinkin’……

VK, your response ignored almost all of the rebuttal I provided to you. If it works for you, I’ll presume that you’ve conceded those points.

Regarding Chicago’s status, that’s another distraction. It’s one of the biggest cities in the United States, and like all big cities, there are issues with crime and violence there. Nobody is disputing that. Nobody is saying that any big city is a magically safe place to live. Nor is anybody saying that having gun regulation is a panacea, and you know that. The point is that having gun regulation, particularly of heavy weapons, provides something for the police to enforce when they do catch criminals with those weapons, and it makes it a lot harder for people to obtain those weapons if they aren’t hardened criminals. Short version – the statistics that you don’t specify would be a lot more severe if everybody could get their hands on an AK-47. And the fact that you can’t or won’t specify your statistics is quite telling.

Either way, you’re unable to answer the fact that having Joe Arpaio’s volunteer “posse” march into Maricopa County schools with their pistols in hand would be a disaster for everyone involved. That’s the real point of this thread, no matter how much you try to distract people from it.

Hey Umad: "Gun laws that prevent felons from getting firearms; Good laws. " If only that were true. See my previous post.

I have been thinking about all the gun related events of the past few weeks, and I am convinced that the only answer to the problem of widespread gun violence is to restrict the availability of guns/ammo across the board. Why? Because Lanza’s mother obtained her guns legally, but her mentally ill son had access to them. Spengler was a felon and could not legally obtain guns, but Dawn Nguyen could legally buy guns, and when she did, she gave them to Spengler. Limit the availability of semi- automatic and automatic weapons and the ammo that goes with them.

Hey, if Vacuous OffKilter/I’m Mad!/Josh’nU Hateway wants the same armed protection in public schools for his kids that the President and other celebs get for theirs in private schools, by all means, go for it.

All you have to do is request it from the same source the President’s kids get their protection from: the US Secret Service . . . but be careful — it would kinda make you look like one of those “moochers” who are always wanting something from the gov’t.

Failing that, you could rely on a private security firm, like Blackwater or Xe or whatever the hell they’re calling themselves these days . . . gotta warn you though, they’re expensive; rightwingnuts already believe things like healthy meals for schoolkids shouldn’t be funded, dunno how you plan on paying their fee . . .

If all else fails, you can go with Sheriff Joe’s Posses . . . I’m sure they’ll work cheap {hell, just tell them they’re there to check immigration status; I guarantee they will} . . . only problem is, as others have mentioned, if they shoot a kid by mistake . . .

.

Gun laws that prevent felons from getting firearms; Good laws. Gun laws that prevent law abiding citizens from getting firearms; Bad laws.

Never said we should have no gun laws. Of course we should have certain gun laws. And its no secret that Chicago is a highly dangerous city. And stats are only irrelevant when they hurt your arguement. In no way can you state that Chicago is a safe city because of their gun laws. You can spin the stats all you want, but it doesnt change the fact that despite tough gun laws in Chicago they have one of the highest rates of gun violence in the country. It is what it is.

VK, you’re starting to drown in irrelevant statistics. Because you don’t point out in there how many of those were suicides, how many were accidental discharges, etc. Nor did you compare those statistics with the numbers from other major cities. And you made no comment on what kind of guns were involved, be they handguns, rifles or automatic weapons. And you forgot to mention how many of those incidents were a chain part of a single incident.

But you knew that. You’re simply trying to distract from the actual matter of discussion, which is the idea of having Joe Arpaio’s “posse” flock to grade schools in Maricopa County with firearms.

But let’s try your idea out – would you like to live in a country with absolutely no gun laws? How do you think that would work out for you?

We’re not comparing states, we’re talking about Chicago and gun laws. Gun death rates per capita per state have nothing to do with my statement on Chicago. The point is that while Chicago has very strict gun laws they are one of the most dangerous cities in the US when it comes to gun violence. Just this year there has been 2,364 shooting incidents in Chicago. Shootings have increased 12% this year and homicides 19%. But, they have great gun laws.

The point is, if gun laws worked, Chicago would be a lot safer. They certainly wouldnt be one of the most violent cities in the US in shooting incidents. Because, you know, those gun laws would stop that.

From VK:
“And gun laws are useless. Just look at Chicago.”
Actually, YOU should come here and look at Chicago.
And profess your idiocy. I’d pay to see that!

But, seriously, it’s easier if you just refer to the following factual graph ranks the gun deaths for EVERY state on a per capita basis. In truth, you are safer here than in any of the red states. Now a lot of this may be way more than you can absorb, but we ARE trying to make you just a bit smarter for 2013!

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000

Joshua, there are also plenty of citizens who think they’ve been trained in the use of handguns and may or may not remember very much of that training. This is why accredited private security firms and established groups like the Secret Service don’t just take anyone into their ranks.

As for the Automatic Weapons Ban, you might want to let the guys on Fox News know about it being in effect, as well as the people in Congress like Dianne Feinstein, who’s trying to reestablish it.

I stand by my position that sending Joe Arpaio’s “posse” into school hallways with firearms would be a recipe for disaster, for all of the specific scenarios I gave you.

@kevin. There are plenty of of citizens who have been trained in the use of hand guns. I am one of them. Automatic weapons are already banned from sale.

Joshua, please read what I said again. You seem to have missed the relevant paragraph. DId you not read about the GOP state legislators trying to force women to have invasive ultrasounds before being able to have an abortion procedure? Did you not pay attention to what has been happening in multiple states, including Louisiana, Virginia and Pennsylvania? It sounds like you’re trying to play with semantics here while the rest of us are trying to have a serious discussion about an important issue. Please have some respect for the seriousness of this matter.

VK, please don’t generalize. I’d be curious to know when I responded to anyone here with name-calling. Or do you object to my using the abbreviation of the name you picked for yourself, and which you vigorously defended on this site?

And if you looked at the article here, you would see that Joe Arpaio is indeed calling for the random group of people in his “posse” to bring guns onto school campuses. That’s a recipe for disaster, and you should know that.

If your argument is that all of our schools should have private security forces like the ones attached to celebrities during events or productions, or public security forces like the Secret Service, you’re taking an interesting position. You’re saying that our schools, which are suffering from considerable underfunding today, should now spend a lot of money either on private or public security forces. Either you are asking for private schools to become even more expensive, or you are asking for taxes to go up to pay for all the Secret Service people we would need to assign to these schools. Or would you like to lose even more teachers than we already have? In the state of California, schools are now several years into a situation where they don’t hire new teachers due to the major budget shortfalls. A friend of mine who works as a teacher has been stuck in a situation where she works as a permanent substitute for the past several years now. You’re not seriously arguing that we should get rid of more teachers and instead of armed security forces with guns in there, are you?

You falsely claim that your statement is not unreasonable. By it’s very nature, you know that it is totally unreasonable. You’re assuming that it’s a better idea to let everyone get their hands on weapons and have a massive hail of bullets as everyone fires at each other, rather than taking the appropriate steps of limiting most people’s access to heavy and automatic weaponry. Are you seriously arguing that it’s reasonable for everyone to have the ability to walk the streets with an assault rifle? What possible use could you have for an assault rifle, other than to shoot a lot of people in a very short period of time, or to shoot one person a heck of a lot of times? Are you seriously arguing that the solution is to have more people with guns on our school campuses?

Finally, your straw man argument about Chicago, a favorite talking point on Fox, ignores the facts that the Assault Weapons Ban actually did have a positive effect. And the new version of it that will be passed this coming year will also have a positive effect.

@kevin I ask again, Visitor55 made blanket statement that conservatives want to spend “billions” to “monitor every uterus in America”… Please show me where conservatives want to do that and the money numbers.

Joshua, it’s nice that you care enough to come here and continue to express debunked right wing talking points.

Let’s take them in order. You mention private schools that have armed security guards from accredited companies – meaning that the guards have been trained and there are insurance policies over the whole matter, etc. Other right wingers mention the private security details assigned to celebrities during various events or productions, where the same situation would apply. Other right wingers bring up the Secret Service. What do all of those situations have in common? Trained professionals with guns, who are insured for the use of those guns. It would seem that your solution to a crazy person stealing his mother’s automatic weaponry and attacking people is for a “posse” from Joe Arpaio – which would be a volunteer group with no training going into school buildings with guns. The possibilities for a disaster are endless. What happens when one of the “posse” pulls a gun on a misbehaving kid? What happens when one of the bigger and older kids in a high school takes the gun away from the untrained “posse”? What happens when a gun battle happens inside the school hallways, and you have a fatal crossfire? Does any of this sound like a good idea?

Second, I find it difficult to believe you were suddenly confused about whether Bolling and Hannity were heterosexual or not. Would you like to try that one again?

Third, there is a difference between private citizens having the right to own a handgun, and private citizens using that right to purchase assault rifles and other automatic weapons. We don’t live in the days of muskets and single shot rifles. We live in the days of high-speed, high-capacity weaponry. Can you think of any reason why a private citizen would need to own such weaponry? And if you’re going to quote the 2nd Amendment, I point you back to the fact that when that Amendment was written, the militias to which it refers were using the above-referenced muskets and rifles. The gun owners who I know have expressed the sentiment that they want to be able to have their handguns for self defense and their rifles for hunting, but even they don’t see a need for assault rifles to be available for the general public.

I would add in response to the ridiculous statement by the NRA that it has a major flaw. If the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to have a good guy with a gun, then I must point out that Adam Lanza’s mother was armed with the best weaponry around, and it didn’t save her. Further, I can pull up multiple examples where these massacres happened specifically when a crazed person planned them and was able to get the weapons to make them happen.

Finally, when you’re discussing the right wing attempts to limit the control of women over their own bodies, it’s disingenous of you to say that it was one specific policy that would cost billions of dollars. It was a whole spread of them – including multiple GOP state legislature attempts to limit or outright ban abortion, and multiple GOP attempts to block access to contraceptives. Some of this was intended in terms of trying to defund Planned Parenthood, but the worst moves were the ones intended to compel women to undergo invasive ultrasounds before being allowed to have an abortion procedure. Both Virginia and Lousiana did this, and Pennsylvania debated it. But I’m sure you knew that before asking your question.

And I thought the right-wing was the side with all the hatred. It seems none of you can discuss anything without insults and name calling.

No one is calling for just handing guns to random people and having them roam the hallways. What we want for our children is the same protection the president and celebrities get for their children. There is nothing unreasonable about that.

And gun laws are useless. Just look at Chicago. There’s a reason the President isnt bragging about how effective their strict gun control laws are in his old stomping grounds. Gun laws have done nothing to stop the horrendous murder rate in that city. Mainly because criminals dont really care if its against the law to have the gun they’re going to use to break the law.

@visitor 55 Btw… Can you tell me where any conservative has proposed to spend billions of dollars monitoring uteri?

@visitor 55. Sorry. I thought Bolling and Hannity were gay judging by the comment. I stand corrected. Thank you.

@visitor55 struck a nerve did I? At least we agree private citizens have the right to arm themselves.

@fred and mj. OMG… A couple of homophobes. Better be careful or you might get banned from this site.

Did you know that the school Obama’s children attend has 12 armed guards?

VK has just been trying to get you guys to jump at the Fox News talking point about how reasonable it is to have a bunch of volunteers hang out in our schools with guns. He raises the false comparison of a Secret Service detail for the President or a specifically-assigned and guard from an accredited and insured service for a celebrity on the one hand, and a group of untrained volunteers with live ammunition in a school hallway on the other. This is more than a bad idea – it’s a potential disaster trying to happen.

We should also remember that Joe Arpaio’s “posse” was more recently tasked wtih that important assignment of looking into President Obama’s birth certificate.

Not all Latinos shun Republicans—Cuban-Americans are still heavily Republican, particularly if they are direct Cuban expats (it’s the anti-Castro factor). I would firmly agree, though, that most Mexican-Americans don’t want anything to do with Republicans if they’re like Arpaio (and they tend to be).

@ Fred Farklestone: “Visualize this: Eric Bolling and Hannity in bed together!”

{{VOMIT}}

.

Having non-white skin is a suspicious activity in Sheriff Joe’s jurisdiction.

From Aria Prescott’s comment:

“…and maybe I’ll stop getting pulled over by officers of the Sheriff’s office that have swastikas on their forearms when I hit the valley to see my family. "

That reminds me of this sendup of an ancient psalm from the Bible (I had this poster up in my dorm room during my college years in the 1980s):

“Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, because I’m the meanest “Son of a B**ch” in the valley".

;^)

Kent State was filled with cops on May 4th, 1970.
Columbine had security guards and police on campus.
Virginia Tech had their own police force.
Fort Hood was a military Base.

But this is airtight, by golly!

And if U’s interested when I get back… I got years of personal experience with what kind of officer Arpaio really is. Including that the only cops in Phoenix who like him are under review for giving black and latino neighborhoods “special treatment.”

The reason he keeps getting elected is because Maricopa County’s 1% love his gestapo tactics, so they buy his elections. As cold as it sounds, everyone else in the valley wouldn’t mind seeing something horrible happen to him, because that’s the only way he’s going. You can flaunt his prison reform all you want…His successor can still do that, while actually doing the rest of his job.

Crime will go down, racial tensions will ease, and maybe I’ll stop getting pulled over by officers of the Sheriff’s office that have swastikas on their forearms when I hit the valley to see my family.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio – a poster child for why Latinos shun Republicans – is salivating at the thought of putting armed posses in Arizona’s public schools.

Gonna check the students’ papers too, Joe?

{And I’m not talking about their homework}

.