View Poll Results: Do gun control laws help reduce crime?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, Less guns equals less crime

    0 0%
  • No, it only disarms the law-abiding citizens

    3 100.00%
  • doesn’t have an effect one way or another

    0 0%
Page 12 of 20 First ... 8910111213141516 ... Last
  1. #122
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    The Threat Posed by Gun Magazine Limits
    Bans on "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" could endanger victims instead of saving them.

    Jacob Sullum | January 16, 2013


    A limit on magazine capacity is emerging as a leading contender for the something that supposedly must be done in response to last month's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. A ban on "large-capacity ammunition feeding devices" is one of the new gun restrictions approved by the New York legislature this week and one of the measures President Obama wants Congress to enact.

    The rationale for such limits is that mass murderers need "large-capacity" magazines, while law-abiding citizens don't. Both premises are questionable, and so is the notion that politicians should be the arbiters of necessity under the Second Amendment.

    The problem with letting legislators decide what gun owners need is immediately apparent when we ask what qualifies as a "large-capacity" magazine. Under current New York law and under the federal limit that expired in 2004 (which Obama wants Congress to reinstate), more than 10 rounds is "large." This week the New York legislature redefined large as more than seven rounds.

    Why? Because seven is less than 10. Duh. Or as Gov. Andrew Cuomo put it last week, "Nobody needs 10 bullets to kill a deer."

    That might count as an argument if the right to keep and bear arms were all about killing deer. But as the Supreme Court has recognized, the Second Amendment is also about defense against individual aggressors, foreign invaders, and tyrannical government.

    Toward those ends, the Court said, the Second Amendment guarantees the right to own weapons "in common use for lawful purposes," which clearly include guns capable of firing more than 10 rounds (and certainly more than seven) without reloading. The Glock 17, one of the most popular handguns in America, comes with a 17-round magazine. One of the most popular rifles, the AR-15 (a style made by several manufacturers), comes with a 30-round magazine.

    Measured by what people actually buy and use, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are hardly outliers. In fact, there are tens (if not hundreds) of millions already in circulation, which is one reason new limits cannot reasonably be expected to have much of an impact on people determined to commit mass murder.

    Another reason is that changing magazines takes one to three seconds, which will rarely make a difference in assaults on unarmed people. The gunman in Connecticut, for example, reportedly fired about 150 rounds, so he must have switched his 30-round magazines at least four times; he stopped only because police were closing in, which prompted him to kill himself.

    Magazine size is more likely to matter for people defending against aggressors, which is why it is dangerously presumptuous for the government to declare that no one needs to fire more than X number of rounds. As self-defense experts such as firearms instructor Massad Ayoob point out, there are various scenarios, including riots, home invasions, and public attacks by multiple aggressors, in which a so-called large-capacity magazine can make a crucial difference, especially when you recognize that people firing weapons under pressure do not always hit their targets and that assailants are not always stopped by a single round.

    Living in Los Angeles during the 1992 riots, I was glad that shopkeepers in Koreatown had "large-capacity" magazines to defend themselves and their property against rampaging mobs. I bet they were too. In fact, argues gun historian Clayton Cramer, those magazines may have saved rioters' lives as well, since they allowed business owners to fire warning shots instead of shooting to injure or kill.

    If magazines holding more than 10 rounds are not useful for self-defense and defense of others, shouldn't the same limit be imposed on police officers and bodyguards (including the Secret Service agents who protect the president)? And if the additional rounds do provide more protection against armed assailants, it hardly makes sense to cite the threat of such attacks as a reason to deny law-abiding citizens that extra measure of safety.

    http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/1...agazine-limits
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement Summer gun wars: Jesse Jackson leads the way
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #123
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    An infantile spectacle
    By RICH LOWRY | 1/16/13 11:00 PM EST



    President Barack Obama set a new standard Wednesday for stupidly exploitative White House events by appearing onstage with children to unveil his gun control proposals. He quoted from letters that the kids had written him. He invoked their Solomonic authority: “Their voices should compel us to change.” He signed executive orders as they gazed on adoringly. He hugged and high-fived them.

    No doubt every parent thinks their little Johnny or Sally is the next James Q. Wilson. That doesn’t make it so. Some of the wisdom that the president shared from his adorable pen pals was, “I love my country and [I] want everybody to be happy and safe,” and “We should learn from what happened at Sandy Hook … I feel really bad.”

    News flash: Kids don’t want bad things to happen. This would be a genuinely useful insight … if we could write public policy in crayon. The White House event smacked of the old unilateral disarmament campaigns of the 1980s when we were supposed to get rid of our nuclear weapons because they scared youngsters.

    We can safely assume that the kids onstage with Obama don’t have a fine-grained sense of the limits of gun control or a proper regard for the Second Amendment. That’s OK, though — neither does he.

    It can’t be said that using kids as props was beneath the gravity of occasion, since the occasion was all about feel-good PR and make-believe. For all the emphasis on stopping another Sandy Hook, Obama didn’t offer anything that would do it.

    The president plugged for a universal background check. Adam Lanza’s mother, who owned the guns he used on his rampage, passed a background check. James Holmes, the Aurora, Colo., shooter, passed two background checks. The Virginia Tech shooter passed two background checks (although he shouldn’t have).

    The president wants a new assault weapons ban. He told of how another school shooting happened in California last week while networks were broadcasting a Biden news conference about the progress of his task force. He didn’t mention that the shooter used a shotgun, not an assault weapon. He could have said that there was yet another shooting this week at a Kentucky community college. The shooter used a semiautomatic pistol.

    During his remarks introducing the president, Biden invoked Colin Goddard, a survivor of the Virginia Tech shooting who was in the audience. Seung-Hui Cho shot him four times. Not with an assault weapon. Cho perpetrated the worst school shooting in U.S. history with a semiautomatic pistol.

    The president called for a ban of magazines of more than 10 rounds (fewer than some guns have as a standard feature). This would have made a difference in Newtown only if you presume that Lanza, who knew his way around firearms, would have been incapable of reloading in the permissive environment of an elementary school without a guard.

    Unfortunately, no one can write a law against mothers owning guns that one day might be turned against them by their deranged sons who then go on to commit horrific acts of murder-suicide. The phenomenon of the shooting rampage is very hard to stop because it is so often committed by disturbed young men without criminal records who don’t care if they are caught and in fact usually want to die.

    These are adult facts that apparently don’t intrude on the childish world of White House policymaking. They must have eluded Biden in the course of his consultations with 229 different groups that just happened to result in recommendations from his task force that anyone could have predicted beforehand.

    In an effort to justify any gun control measure, no matter how ineffectual or symbolic, Biden talks of adopting an “if it saves one life” standard. If that really were the White House’s guiding principle — politics and the expense be damned — it would push massive stop-and-frisk crackdowns in the nation’s cities to get illegal guns off the streets. It would take up the NRA’s proposal for armed guards at every school in America. But what it really wants is as much gun control as it can plausibly get in the aftermath of the shock of Newtown. As Rahm Emanuel might put it, never let a massacre go to waste.

    There’s no reason for kids to see through it. Discerning adults should.


    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2IOJG2eO7

    comments

    "If just one child's life can be saved..."
    Every one nods their head a wipes a tear.=> phony posturing.

    On that basis, everything from automobiles to toilets should be banned.

    Fine. Let's start with the ACLU ... the organization that keeps the crazies on the street.

    ...

    So the NRA can't compare the value of life of the President's kids to everyone elses children to make a point, but the President could USE these kids to make his own point.

    Yes, he USED these kids to make a point.

    Pretty disgusting and way way beneath the Office of the President.

    ...

    "… if we could write public policy in crayon."
    If children COULD write our public policy, it would make far more sense than what is coming out of Washington these days. Children are smart enough to know we need to spend less then we earn.

    ..

    The imperial president hides behind children and exploits them in order to justify his actions. Anyone who disagrees with his actions is perceived to be "against the children."

    To wage the "war against women" last year, the imperial president hid behind Sandra Fluck's skirt (or pants) when he defended his actions about contraceptive/abortion pill coverage requirements. Anyone disagreeing with his imperial requirements was deemed to be picking on a defenseless woman, nevermind that she, a law school student, will soon be making a six figure salary as a lawyer and could easily afford her own contraceptive issues.

    When it was time to justify passing obamacare, the sob cases were trotted out and the imperial president hid behind the stories and those people. Anyone against socialist health care was deemed a bad person who didn't care for those without insurance. The socialist healthcare is now law, prices are skyrocketing for everything associated with the law and more people won't be covered as a result. And many people are finding out that their healthcare isn't going to be "free" as they were led to believe.

    What about "Fast and Furious" Mr. Imperial president? How about the hundreds of innocents killed because you provided cartel members with guns which went across the border? What about Benghazi, Mr. Imperial president? We still don't have answers about our ambassador's assassination. And because you promised muslims would love Americans as a result of your presidency, we have American hostages seized in Mali. Ask the Sandy hurricane victims about your promise to "lower the seas" as well. Your promises are working out so well for all of us!

    ...

    Using children as props for a photo op is the lowest and sickest this “man” has done yet. Want effective gun control? Use the laws already in place. Prosecute to the fullest extent of the law anyone that commits a crime with a firearm. NO PLEA DEALS!! Use federal statutes that are on the books so that these criminals are not in the state of their residency for the full period of their incarceration. Criminals do not obtain their weapons through BATF authorized gun dealers. Ask Chicago, how many people are dying there from legal firearms? Not one executive order he signed yesterday will do anything to get guns out of the hands of criminals!! Disarming law abiding citizens will only make crime worse. In the states that have right to carry laws, violent crime has gone down. Criminals are less inclined to rob or burglarize places and people that might be armed because they don’t really want to die either. Except for the Aurora shooting, all these other shooters wanted to die to begin with. Evil does exist in this world and until people come to realize this and the fact that police can only help to clean up the mess after the fact; we will continue to have violence in any form. As for the Ft. Hood shooting, the soldiers were not allowed to carry their firearms while on the installation or that traitor would have been dropped quickly.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  4. #124
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Gun Solutions, Not Gun Control: Gun Free Zones Should be Liable For Murders
    18 Jan 2013

    Most of the mass shootings lately have happened in self proclaimed gun free zones. They have been a drawing card for deranged killers who want to make sure they can fire into defenseless people without the worry of having fire returned.

    Time and again these gun free zones have been targeted and time and again, people are bewildered why it happens. But the answer is simple; these advertised gun free zones invite attack.

    Politicians simplistic solution is to put tighter restrictions on law abiding citizens, thinking if they make it harder to obtain a certain type of firearm, it will make the senseless shootings stop. It won’t.

    But perhaps it’s time to assign responsibility to those who think they can proclaim an area a gun free zone with a sign or a proclamation, but don’t provide protection for the people that frequent those locations.

    Airports and commercial aircraft are “gun free zones.” You can be pretty much assured that these gun free zones offer you protection by strict security screening of those they allow in and plenty of armed security on the premises to quell any violence that may occur. Government buildings in Washington DC are “gun free zones.” There is armed security everywhere, seen and unseen, to protect the precious ruling class.

    In the self proclaimed, utopian, “gun free” zones set up all over America, law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry firearms. For that trade off, shouldn’t patrons, students, and employees expect tight security? If these entities are going to require law abiding citizens to be helpless, whether it is a movie theater, shopping mall, school or office building, don’t they owe their clientele the utmost security that can be provided?

    The stark reality of this truth came through loud and clear when James O’Keefe, of undercover video fame, targeted journalists, many of whom were involved in the public outing of gun owners in their community. O’Keefe’s group, “Project Veri tas” poses as “Citizens Against Senseless Violence,” and visits the homes of journalists working for Westchester Journal News, MSNBC, and the Star-Ledger. They also visit the home of Eric Holder. Hypocritically, none will take the signs that say “THIS HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE.”

    Even the rabid anti gun members of the left leaning media know that proclaiming you are a gun free zone, announces to the world you are easy pickings. Perhaps it’s time for the litigation industry to pick up on this fact when they seek damages for the death and injury gun free zones have triggered.


    Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/01/gun-solu...#ixzz2ION9JS61

    comments

    This has been proven over and over. Only the law abiding citizen will obey the law. The criminals, creeps and rapish laugh at these stupid laws that only a fool like Bloomingidiot could purpose and pass. What is wrong with the mentally challeged citizens of New york, that they would allow something like gun free zones.

    ..

    My schools never had a problem, Dad, the principle was armed concealed. After he left, the male teachers that were coming home from 'the war', mostly carried. All were concealed (they had witnessed powerful Evil and knew it was only Stopped one way)...No Problems, Ever. Of course that was also before the ACLU demanded that all 'asylums' be dumped and no one could be 'ordered' to go into mental health treatment.

    The mentally deranged had to 'put themselves away', after that ruling of insanity. Then we had the pleasure of 'The Great Society' and the USA became historically famous as, 'The most Drug Addicted nation in History'. Now with SSRI's prescribed to everyone that is Depressed, along with the USA consuming 82% of the 'entire world's production of Oxycodone type pain killers we are enviable...and bankrupt.

    Amphetamines being so desirable, violent and often deadly pharmacy invasions are rampant, we now have an easy 4% of society Bipolar (MDD). Add to that lovely scenario, the US legal system, that encourages 'Career Repeat Offenders' to roam among law abiding society. Isn't that comforting? By all means Disarm the remaining 96%, so that we will be Safe?
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #125

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    5,185
    Thanks
    86
    Thanked 852 Times in 390 Posts
    Criminals do not obey laws. What idiots they are.

    Me

  6. #126
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by hblueeyes View Post
    Criminals do not obey laws. What idiots they are.

    Me

    Gun Control For Dummies



    People Sleep Peacefully in Their Beds at Night
    Only Because Rough Men Stand Ready
    to Do Violence on Their Behalf


    ~~ George Orwell
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  7. #127
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    How Obama's gun 'order' will backfire

    Exclusive: David Kupelian on what happened last time a president made same demand
    Published: 2 days ago

    Among the 23 “executive actions” President Obama announced yesterday amidst great fanfare (and shameless exploitation of children) is this:

    “Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.”
    Obama may want to put a hold on that one, until he comes to grips with what happened the last time a U.S. president tried it.

    During the late ’70s, President Jimmy Carter and his inner circle determined to push through comprehensive new federal gun-control legislation. They decided the best way to grease the congressional skids would be to have a massive scientific study conducted which, in the end, would proclaim that gun-control laws were effective in reducing crime.

    So the Carter folks handed out a major gun-control research grant to University of Massachusetts sociology professor James D. Wright and his colleagues Peter Rossi and Kathleen Daly. They spent four years and lots of tax dollars to produce what would be the most comprehensive, critical study of gun control ever undertaken. In 1981, they published the results of their research – an exhaustive, three-volume work titled “Under the Gun.”

    There was only one problem.

    Their findings, summarized starkly by co-author Wright, were that “Gun control laws do not reduce crime.”

    “When Wright, Rossi and Daly produced their report for the National Institute of Justice, they delivered a document quite different from the one they had expected to write,” explained David Kopel, research director of the Independence Institute and co-author of the law school textbook, “Firearms Law and the Second Amendment.” “Carefully reviewing all existing research to date, the three scholars found no persuasive scholarly evidence that America’s 20,000 gun-control laws had reduced criminal violence.”

    Among their many findings:

    •The landmark federal Gun Control Act of 1968, banning most interstate gun sales, had no discernible impact on the criminal acquisition of guns from other states.

    •Detroit’s law providing mandatory sentences for felonies committed with a gun was found to have no effect on gun-crime patterns.

    •Washington, D.C.’s 1977 ban on the ownership of handguns (except those already registered in the District) was not linked to any reduction in gun crime in the nation’s capital.

    •Polls claiming to show that a large majority of the population favored “more gun control” were debunked as being the product of biased questions, and of the fact that most people have no idea how strict gun laws already are.

    “As the scholars frankly admitted, they had started out their research as gun-control advocates,” said Kopel, “and had been forced to change their minds by a careful review of the evidence.”

    Fast-forward to the late ’80s, when the women of Orlando, Fla., were terrified of being sexually attacked, since 33 women had already been raped in just one nine-month period. After people began flocking to gun stores to protect themselves, the Orlando Sun-Sentinel newspaper got together with the police to offer a firearms safety course.

    It was all very well publicized. Everybody knew that in Orlando there were 6,000 women who had handguns and knew how to use them. The result was that in the following nine-month period, there were only three rapes. In addition, crime in general declined. The fact is, Orlando, Fla., was the only U.S. city with a population of over 100,000 that had a reduction in crime that year.

    In fact, it is not only Orlando that experienced a dramatic decrease in crime. After the 1987 Florida right-to-carry legislation, homicide, firearm homicide and handgun homicide rates all decreased. Eight of Florida’s 10 largest cities experienced drastic decreases in homicide rates from 1987 through 1995: Jacksonville, down 46 percent; Miami, down 13 percent; Tampa Bay, down 24 percent; Orlando, down 41 percent; Fort Lauderdale, down 53 percent; Hollywood, down 30 percent; Clearwater, down 21 percent; and Miami Beach down an incredible 93 percent.

    Opponents of Florida’s right-to-carry legislation claimed their state would become known as the “Gunshine State.” But the last quarter century’s actual experience (as of mid-2011, Florida has issued a total of 2,031,106 concealed-carry permits under the 1987 law) proves Florida’s trailblazing program to fight crime has been a tremendous success. As U.S. Sen. Orin Hatch, R- Utah, put it: “The effect of that legislation on state crime rates has been astonishing. The predictions of the gun-control advocates were wrong, flat wrong.”

    But no matter. Politicians and others intent on restricting or eliminating firearms ownership ignore mountains of evidence, virtually all of which points to the same conclusion – that guns in the hands of responsible, law-abiding citizens always, in all places and times, result in a safer, more secure and more civilized society.

    Therefore, if the Centers for Disease Control, at Obama’s direction, actually conducts honest research – and that’s a magnum-caliber “if” – it will arrive at the same conclusion as Jimmy Carter’s research team: Their basic premise is wrong.

    As John Lott, former chief economist at the U.S. Sentencing Commission, crime-statistic researcher and author of the widely cited book, “More Guns, Less Crime,” reiterated today:“Gun control just does not work. Indeed, it makes things worse.

    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/how-obama...ZVXYMVDRSe0.99
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  8. #128
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    It has just been researched and discovered there IS a common thread to the five worst mass shooting in America! It is "not poor gun control" as liberals would have you think but instead LIBERALISM itself! Now that we have discovered that all 5 mass shootings were related to them being liberal Democrats, should we regulate registered liberal democrats now instead of guns? Take a look below at the evidence just uncovered.......

    The five worst mass killings have a common thread. Hint #1: None of them belonged to the NRA.

    Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat and radical Muslim who supported Al Qaeda and Hamas

    Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals

    Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

    Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal

    Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians.

    Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats. Check the story link below.

    http://clashdaily.com/2013/01/the-5-...rom-democrats/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  9. #129
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    After calling for 23 gun control measures, Vice President Biden claimed that we need more gun laws because we don’t have enough time to enforce existing gun laws. ?? ?? Does that make sense to you? Take our survey and let us know: http://www.theteaparty.net/survey-bi...more-gun-laws/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  10. #130
    pepperpot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    exactly where I should be...
    Posts
    8,566
    Thanks
    4,402
    Thanked 3,793 Times in 2,027 Posts
    Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal
    Wow, that got buried in the news.....

    Look what those oppressive darn Republicans made those poor tortured souls do!
    Mrs Pepperpot is a lady who always copes with the tricky situations that she finds herself in....

  11. #131
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge View Post
    It has just been researched and discovered there IS a common thread to the five worst mass shooting in America! It is "not poor gun control" as liberals would have you think but instead LIBERALISM itself! Now that we have discovered that all 5 mass shootings were related to them being liberal Democrats, should we regulate registered liberal democrats now instead of guns? Take a look below at the evidence just uncovered.......

    The five worst mass killings have a common thread. Hint #1: None of them belonged to the NRA.

    Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat and radical Muslim who supported Al Qaeda and Hamas

    Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals

    Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

    Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal

    Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians.

    Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats. Check the story link below.

    http://clashdaily.com/2013/01/the-5-...rom-democrats/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  12. #132
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Our politicians need to know that we will not support unconstitutional legislation...

    <<LETTER CONTENTS BELOW>>



    Dear Mr. Vice President,

    I am Sheriff Tim Mueller, elected twice by the citizens of Linn County Oregon who have entrusted me with a noble cause: to keep them and their families safe. My deputies and I take that responsibility very seriously and, like you, have sworn to support the Constitution of the United States. I take that oath equally as serious as protecting our citizens. I have worked for the people of Linn County for over 28 years as a member of the Linn County Sheriff's Office as well as serving three years active duty as a Military Police Officer in the US Army, where I also swore a similar oath.

    In the wake of the recent criminal events, politicians are attempting to exploit the deaths of innocent victims by advocating for laws that would prevent honest, law abiding Americans from possessing certain firearms and ammunition magazines. We are Americans. We must not allow, nor shall we tolerate, the actions of criminals, no matter how heinous the crimes, to prompt politicians to enact laws that will infringe upon the liberties of responsible citizens who have broken no laws.

    Any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the President offending the constitutional rights of my citizens shall not be enforced by me or by my deputies, nor will I permit the enforcement of any unconstitutional regulations or orders by federal officers within the borders of Linn County Oregon.

    In summary, it is the position of this Sheriff that I refuse to participate, or stand idly by, while my citizens are turned into criminals due to the unconstitutional actions of misguided politicians.

    Respectfully,

    Sheriff Tim Mueller
    Linn County Oregon
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in