posted April 17, 2013 10:01 PM            

Did youknow that the number of household w/guns has been decreasing for years? Despite the big sales, it's not more people, but less, buying more guns.

And once again, civics 101, it was not obama's bill. He doesn't makethe laws but "choose which ones hewill sign" as boehner famously stated.

"king" doesn't describe the man who is urging people to individually lobby their reps, quite the opposite.

posted April 17, 2013 10:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Check out the crybaby look on Biden's face!

Give the government an inch, and they will take a mile. Look at the income tax. It was sold as a tax-the-rich temporary instrument to pay for the war.

---

Loved the sullen, resentful, whiny look on Obama's face. One of the best times in his presidency for those of us who love our country, as it was FOUNDED!

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted April 18, 2013 12:15 AM            

SENATORS say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them.

On Wednesday, a minority of senators gave into fear and blocked common-sense legislation that would have made it harder for criminals and people with dangerous mental illnesses to get hold of deadly firearms — a bill that could prevent future tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., and too many communities to count.

Some of the senators who voted against the background-check amendments have met with grieving parents whose children were murdered at Sandy Hook, in Newtown. Some of the senators who voted no have also looked into my eyes as I talked about my experience being shot in the head at point-blank range in suburban Tucson two years ago, and expressed sympathy for the 18 other people shot besides me, 6 of whom died. These senators have heard from their constituents — who polls show overwhelmingly favored expanding background checks. And still these senators decided to do nothing...

by gabby giffords...who has first hand accounts of what these senators are "afraid of"...and it's not the breaking of the second amendment, is it?

posted April 18, 2013 01:28 AM            

of course people will find a way if they are intent enough. as we saw in boston, you don't need a gun at all! on the other hand, why should the people who already own guns insist on the right to have an equal number to a military base? as i said, the NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS owning guns has been going DOWN, while the people who already have guns are buying in record numbers.

reagan banned mailorder gun sales, didn't he? why shouldn't gun shows and internet sales be tightened up, at least to the tune of background checks?

and in the gabby giffords incident i believe there was a psychologist who waved a red flag and no one listened.

posted April 18, 2013 07:21 AM            

*Spoken in a Jesse Jackson voice* -----I can say this DEFIIIIINITIVELY and ABSOOOLUTELY. You make no sense

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted April 18, 2013 12:06 PM            

it's not that big a burden to do a background check. and i expect it will be made even easier to accomodate those birdbrains who can't manage it.

driving may be a privilege where you live but a lot of people couldn't work without that privilege. is it more important to be able to kill people(or animals for sport) than to work??

i don't care if you feel you need 50 guns. but it does indicate some psych issues and in itself would be a red flag for 90% of the country.

so you think because a few addicts are afraid they will fail the background check the vast majority of the country should be ignored?

has it ever occurred to you that the people who REALLY object to background checks are the ones with SOMETHING TO HIDE? ie, the criminals you think will get the guns anyway? now they don't have to even think for two minutes to get a gun, it sure would be horrible if it was made a little harder, wouldn't it?

posted April 18, 2013 12:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Gun violence has been about the same each year for the past few decades. No gun law that liberals can concoct will change that. The far left has been trying to take away America's guns for years. Sorry, but it won't work. I still see those stupid bumper stickers: "Make guns illegal, and only criminals will have guns." It's funny, because that's exactly right. The criminals will have all the guns. Duh!

Juni, background checks place a burden on private sellers, punishing the law-abiding citizen for the actions of a few. The real issue is more control by the feds to inch their way into more erosion of the Constitution.

---

As I understood it (and will google)private gun sales would not have been effected.

posted April 18, 2013 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

The background check compromise measure was brokered by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. It extends checks to gun shows and Internet sales but not to private sales .

---

This is one of many sites stating so.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/14/gun-rights-group-endorses-background-check-deal/

posted April 18, 2013 01:31 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal