The good stuff starts at about 15 minutes. "I do not accept that we cannot find a common-sense way to preserve our traditions including our basic 2nd Amendment freedoms and the rights of law-abiding gun owners while at the same time reducing the gun violence that unleashes so much mayhem on a regular basis. And it may not happen tomorrow, and it may not happen next week, may not happen next month, but it will happen, because it's the change that we need and it's the change overwhelmingly supported by the majority of Americans."
Click here for the video
I'm sure you listened to every word from the messiah. I do wish you people would stop using the term, common sense. It clearly has no meaning, given what we know you want, and it's not helping your cause any.
ReplyDeleteOne of your tricks, to mollify your extremism, is to pretend we want extreme measures ourselves. You do that because you realize to argue against what we really do want would be foolish.
DeleteMike,
DeleteLast week I laid out a listing of proposals from you and your allies which would outlaw and require the forfeiture of nearly every if not every firearm I own. You never replied. Should I dig it out and repost it so that you can tell us which items you support and which ones you officially disavow and side with us on?
And I've repeatedly listed the ridiculous list of demands that you have, Mikeb, but you always repeat the claim that you only want to go after the worst of the worst.
DeleteT., as usual you're exaggerating to make me sound more extreme than I am.
DeleteGreg, my proposals would leave about half of you guys armed. The other half would include most of the troublemakers. But, in your whining victimist way, you find that unacceptable.
How am I exaggerating? All I said was that your side has proposed multiple laws that, together, would outlaw every gun I own. You, yourself, support laws that would get most of them, and which might outlaw all of them--we can't tell since you refuse to give details of your ideas.
DeleteMikeb, I've shown you many times how your claim about fifty percent is false. It's false that half of us are unfit, and it's false that what you want would only legally disarm half of us.
DeleteT., when you say this, "All I said was that your side has proposed multiple laws that, together, would outlaw every gun I own. " it's total bullshit and I'll tell you why. By MY SIDE you mean every gun control advocate that has ever proposed a law. Of course if you take them all "together" they would deprive you of every gun you own.
DeleteDo you see how misleading that is? It's like saying there are 20,000 gun control laws on the books now. We don't need one more.
This is why you're known as a liar. You try to pass off tricky shit like that as part of an argument and then you say you don't know how I feel because I refuse to give details.
Man, you are full of shit.
#1 Even if I intended to make you answer for every person on your side, that would be perfectly fair according to your standards. You try to make us responsible for the actions of anyone who owns a gun.
Delete#2 Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough in this post--I wasn't talking about proposals from Nemo Nobody in Kalimazoo, I was talking about mainstream legislative proposals many of which you have expressed support for such as assault weapon bans, sniper rifle bans, etc. as the original post made clear.
#3 You say that I'm misleading for talking about various proposals together, but the comment I was responding to said, "[You] pretend we want extreme measures ourselves. You do that because you realize to argue against what we really do want would be foolish." I was addressing what you (plural since you talked about "we") want.
So, no, I'm not a liar. I was engaging what you said about what gun control activists, collectively, want. I referred to a post where I talked about specific proposals.
As for my comment about you not giving details, you say that you want an AWB "based on California's" but you give no details. We know you don't think Bayonets are a big deal, but bayonet stubs are illegal under California's law. We know you have a problem with semi-autos in general, but Cali doesn't ban all of them. We really don't know what your law based on theirs would look like--it's a valid criticism of you setting us up to argue against a phantom.
Mikeb, I say that all of your proposals would effectively be a total ban. And yes, given all the gun control we already have, we certainly don't need any more.
DeleteRight, like common sense is taking the law into you own hands and accepting death as a numerical certainty.
ReplyDeleteAh, yes! We can totally trust Obama to protect the 2nd Amendment while instituting gun controls--it's not like he has a history of breaking promises and eroding freedoms further than any of his predecessors.
ReplyDeleteEroding Tennessean? I wouldn't call what this president has done as simply eroding. That's too small of an example. What he hasn't been able to accomplish and wanted to, doesn't even come into the realm of the word eroding. That would have been an order of magnitude far worse.
Delete"further than any of his predecessors." You must be joking. That's ridiculous. W. still has them all beat with that trumped up war in Iraq.
DeleteThat trumped up war didn't affect personal freedoms in this country Mike.
DeleteBush at least asked for the AUMF before engaging in that war. Obama bombed the shit out a Lybia beyond the period where he was supposed to go to Congress to get approval to continue, and as that deadline went by he thumbed his nose at it claiming that the executive didn't need Congressional approval.
DeleteObama has likewise expanded other powers that Bush first asserted, now pushing Congress to authorize the indefinite detention of "terrorism" suspects, even if they're arrested in the U.S.
W. Pushed the envelope further than anyone before him, but Obama has pushed even further. He may not have expanded the president's war making power by as great a magnitude as W., but he certainly has expanded it rather than pulling it back.
Was that the best attempt you could come up with to convince us to trust Obama?
Of course, what else should we expect--rather than berate the President and his cabinet for wanting a war in Syria, you instead decided to preemptively insult those who might be sent in to risk their lives.
"That trumped up war didn't affect personal freedoms in this country Mike."
DeleteThat's a pretty narrow world view and a debatable one. The damage in loss of life and international reputation certainly does affect our personal freedoms. But, you're only thinking about gun rights.
T., I'm not defending Obama generally. I'm saying his views on gun control are right on.
DeleteBy the way, you sure sound like one of those Obama haters, tripping over your own words to attack him. You fault him for bombing Libya and you fault him for not bombing Syria.
Where did you get the impression that I was faulting him for not bombing Syria? I never said any such thing--on the contrary, I've called all of my Congresscritters and told them to avoid getting entangled in that morass.
DeleteBut then, you know best. I must have hallucinated that and really just be an irrational Obama Hater. There's no way I could hold a consistent view on foreign policy--I must be programmed by that Fox News channel that I never watch (or never THINK I watch--how insidious).
As for your not defending Obama generally, but thinking his views on Gun Control are "right on," nothing in his history indicates that we can trust what he says his views are. In the end, he might not go as far as you want, or he might go much farther.
Additionally, his "right on" views resulted in his appointing Joe Biden to oversee the issue. Joe who you lambasted for his dumbass advice. I'm glad the administration has such a noted expert running point on the issue--I'm sure he'll see his way to make excellent, clear, and helpful laws.
Mike said,
Delete"That's a pretty narrow world view and a debatable one. The damage in loss of life and international reputation certainly does affect our personal freedoms. But, you're only thinking about gun rights."
Really Mike, Guns?
Mike, guns are the last thing I am concerned about right now. The freedoms of this country are taken away piece by piece by this administration. The freedom to choose being on top of the list. I went over this before, with just a small example. Some of you may find some of those examples laughable, go ahead and laugh but as you give him enough rope to hang this country you will be laughing yourself into strangulation. The implications of what he has already succeeded in doing is astounding.
Privacy? The NSA has not only destroyed that but Obama has expanded that into a spy program that now this country is no longer trusted by the rest of the world. The European nations caught the NSA pulling data without permission from their data systems. To what end is unknown to us but the security risk of the US is still unfolding.
Our economic strength has folded, our diplomacy standing is failing. Obama has handed those leading powers to Russia and Russia is laughing at us at every advantage. Openly ridiculing the idea of American people being exceptional. The US is no more than a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world as Obamas leadership has failed and does nothing now other than to make excuses for everything. The US is viewed now as no more than a toothless heal hound.
Syria as an example. When Obama did his call to arms from the rest of the world, what happened? The world said they were going to sit this one out and laughed at him.
The American economy is being destroyed by his policies and he is not done yet. He has lied about his "affordable care act" and there are things and bad laws that are STILL being discovered in this act. The world and more than half the people in this country warned him what would happen if he went down the road he chose, now look where we are.
Mike, it may be getting too late to save this country. We may have gone down the road too far I think. Unless enough people finally wake up and say no more, even the gun wont help us.
Mike, your view is very narrow and very debatable. You take a narrow minded view of a single subject despite the consequences involved is quite telling. Guns, please. What good are they going to be without a country to save or defend.
"The freedoms of this country are taken away piece by piece by this administration."
DeleteTexas, don't you mean by the last two administrations?
How many freedom destroying administrations do we have to list to make you happy? This one is the one currently taking our freedoms away--Bush isn't still doing it. He did his damage. Bill did his. George the First did his, and the others have done their damage--now it's time to fight Obama's current damage and then try to make up the ground lost to his predecessors.
DeleteBut nice job using moral equivalence to try to derail a discussion you didn't like the direction of.
DeleteThis administration is responsible for its own actions. Obama promised to correct, clean up and put this country back on the right track and has done everything but. Each administration has the power to correct the previous administrations ill fated actions. The blame falls squarely on Obamas actions now. He owns the problems we have. Once he is out of office, he wont get any more blame from me, if the next doesn't fix it and head this country in the right direction, the blame goes to the next administration.
DeleteThis is the reason we have elections, not a dictatorship. People may lie to get the votes, and they do, then we elect another.
This is Obamas mess, not Bush, not Clinton but Obama. He made the decision to make things worse instead of better.
You're absolutely right about Obama. But, I'm still probing for a bit of feedback on George W. Were you as critical of his administration as you are of the current one? Or, are you in retrospect? (Be careful, this is a racist trap).
DeleteWhen Bush was President, I was critical of him too. I was the same about Clinton, Reagan, Carter, any one of them whose policies were affecting this country and/or my livelihood. Don't try the racist crap with me Mike, don't you remember who you are addressing? I have lived and still live thru racism as well as my forefathers. You may THINK you know racism is Mike, but really you have no clue.
DeleteI could probably equate half of what you say to me as racist. You have taken a racist stance against me before. Laci tries to do the same with his examples but you guys really don't know what your talking about. You have never lived it.
Racist trap, really Mike? I have trapped you and Laci more than once. You guys really believe all your commenters are white. Wake up!
Mike,
DeleteWhen Bush first ran, I couldn't vote, but I naively supported him because, while I didn't think he was the best candidate in the primary, he claimed to support more positions I supported than Gore. Part of this was that I was still a child and thought like a child--I've grown since then. Part of it was also that Bush claimed to support minding our own business in foreign affairs.
As his first term went on, spending went nuts, he began showing his true face in foreign policy, and we got such lovely things as the PATRIOT Act. At the same time, I began maturing and growing out of the neo-con tendencies that seemed natural as a child--my parents began a similar reevaluation.
By 2004 I could vote and nobody in my home voted for Bush. We didn't vote for Kerry either because we saw both as big spenders and dangers to our liberties. During Bush's second term, yes, I was critical of him. So much so that my Liberal professor in a rhetoric class kept asking if she could use my papers as examples in future classes--all but the final project which shocked her into silence when she found out that it was a defense of a pro-life stance (still got an A on it, just surprised her that I could hold such a position when I had so thoroughly ripped Bush's positions).
In retrospect, I'm still as critical as I ever was of Bush. Probably more in some areas where I've learned more.
This is the same prez that is simultaneously arming bad people in Syria so they can kill as many government people and Christians as they can. Extraordinary doublethink by Mikeb and his carnival of clowns.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
Giving them genuine assault rifles without magazine limits or background checks.
Delete"That trumped up war didn't affect personal freedoms in this country Mike."
ReplyDeleteOh no? The Patriot Act, listening in on phone calls, knowing what you check out of the library, airline screenings, monitoring the web, etc., etc., etc.. The privacy abuses we hear about now started with Bush and his excuse was to keep us safe from terrorists. HA HA HA HA HA HA Gullible NRA dupes!
The PATRIOT Act was passed in October of 2001, a year and a half before the Iraq War started.
DeleteAs Greg said, those problems all started because 9/11 caused a panic that allowed the executive branch (with the legislative branch's help) to grab those new powers--those weren't a result of the Iraq war. It only added, slightly, to the situation at home touched off by 9/11.
DeleteAnd yes, BOOSH DID IT! Thing is, Obama did it too--and in the cases you mention, Obama has done it harder and pushed the envelope further. Those of us opposed to it now mostly opposed it then. Some had the wool pulled over their eyes then, but have opened them up, and those were none too happy with Romney and the idea that he would do the same things as hard or harder than Obama.
So they did effect your privacy. Thought so.
DeleteWas that supposed to be some sort of burn? Maybe some kind of implication that we are terrorists and that's why we dislike the PATRIOT Act? After you cited it and other things as abuses?
DeleteThe force is not strong with this one.
Nice to know you approve of Bush taking your privacy away. Figures, but proves again you are a hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteWho said they approve of Bush taking privacy away? Or are you just arguing with a straw man for the hell of it?
DeleteJim, there are plenty of actual ideas that we can disagree on. Why do you have to make things up?
DeleteSome idiot said that trumped up war didn't effect personal freedoms in America, just pointing out that was a lie. But you NRA extremists just keep lying.
Delete