Electro Rock Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 What do you expect from the Communist News Network? For one thing, the words "intimidate and threaten" are weaselly, they could mean anything from holding a rapist at gunpoint, deterring an imminent attack to some thug waving a gun around. Most of the reason for having a gun for self defense is deterrence, even in the police context, and you don't see the police pushing to get rid of their guns despite the actual and supposed negatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 What do you expect from the Communist News Network? For one thing, the words "intimidate and threaten" are weaselly, they could mean anything from holding a rapist at gunpoint, deterring an imminent attack to some thug waving a gun around. Most of the reason for having a gun for self defense is deterrence, even in the police context, and you don't see the police pushing to get rid of their guns despite the actual and supposed negatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 What do you expect from the Communist News Network? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Who says that Bush and ilk aren't statist elitists to the same degree as Obama? In many ways Obama is simply Bush Jr II, although cast in more of a "good cop" role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 If CNN is the "Communist News Network". then FOX is undoubtedly the "Full Of Xcrement" network? .. makes perfect sense now .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 If CNN is the "Communist News Network". then FOX is undoubtedly the "Full Of Xcrement" network? .. makes perfect sense now .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I'd agree actually, as not only does it follow the same formula as CNN but there are many who believe it to be ultimately controlled by the same people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 That's the case with pretty much every mainstream news outlet these days, which is why it's essential that the internet remains relatively free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 That's the case with pretty much every mainstream news outlet these days, which is why it's essential that the internet remains relatively free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Looks like everyone is singing Kumbya now! All rainbows and unicorns now fellas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Looks like everyone is singing Kumbya now! All rainbows and unicorns now fellas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudeone Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 National Rifle Association vows to fight arms trade treaty at U.N. - Yahoo! News By Louis Charbonneau | Reuters – 20 hrs ago http://news.yahoo.com/national-rifle-association-vows-fight-arms-trade-treaty-061206196.html UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The leading U.S. pro-gun group, the National Rifle Association, has vowed to fight a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global arms trade and dismissed suggestions that a recent U.S. school shooting bolstered the case for such a pact. The U.N. General Assembly voted on Monday to restart negotiations in mid-March on the first international treaty to regulate conventional arms trade after a drafting conference in July collapsed because the U.S. and other nations wanted more time. Washington supported Monday's U.N. vote. U.S. President Barack Obama has come under intense pressure to tighten domestic gun control laws after the December 14 shooting massacre of 20 children and six educators at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. His administration has since reiterated its support for a global arms treaty that does not curtail U.S. citizens' rights to own weapons. Arms control campaigners say one person every minute dies as a result of armed violence and a convention is needed to prevent illicitly traded guns from pouring into conflict zones and fueling wars and atrocities. In an interview with Reuters, NRA President David Keene said the Newtown massacre has not changed the powerful U.S. gun lobby's position on the treaty. He also made clear that the Obama administration would have a fight on its hands if it brought the treaty to the U.S. Senate for ratification. "We're as opposed to it today as we were when it first appeared," he said on Thursday. "We do not see anything in terms of the language and the preamble as being any kind of guarantee of the American people's rights under the Second Amendment." The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the right to bear arms. Keene said the pact could require the U.S. government to enact legislation to implement it, which the NRA fears could lead to tighter restrictions on gun ownership. He added that such a treaty was unlikely to win the two-thirds majority in the U.S. Senate necessary for approval. "This treaty is as problematic today in terms of ratification in the Senate as it was six months ago or a year ago," Keene said. Earlier this year a majority of senators wrote to Obama urging him to oppose the treaty. U.N. delegates and gun-control activists say the July treaty negotiations fell apart largely because Obama, fearing attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney before the November 6 election if his administration was seen as supporting the pact, sought to kick the issue past the U.S. vote. U.S. officials have denied those allegation. The NRA claimed credit for the July failure, calling it at the time "a big victory for American gun owners." NRA IS 'TELLING LIES' The main reason the arms trade talks are taking place at all is that the United States - the world's biggest arms trader, which accounts for more than 40 percent of global transfers in conventional arms - reversed U.S. policy on the issue after Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty. Supporters of the treaty accuse the NRA of deceiving the American public about the pact, which they say will have no impact on U.S. domestic gun ownership and would apply only to exports. Last week, Amnesty International launched a campaign to counter what it said were NRA distortions about the treaty. "The NRA is telling lies about the arms treaty to try to block U.S. government support," Michelle Ringuette of Amnesty International USA said about the campaign. "The NRA's leadership must stop interfering in U.S. foreign policy on behalf of the arms industry." Jeff Abramson of Control Arms said that as March approaches, "the NRA is going to be challenged in ways it never has before and that can affect the way things go" with the U.S. government. The draft treaty under discussion specifically excludes arms-related "matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State." Among its key provisions is a requirement that governments make compliance with human rights norms a condition for foreign arms sales. It would also have states ban arms transfers when there is reason to believe weapons or ammunition might be diverted to problematic recipients or end up on illicit markets. Keene said the biggest problem with the treaty is that it regulates civilian arms, not just military weapons. According to the Small Arms Survey, roughly 650 million of the 875 million weapons in the world are in the hands of civilians. That, arms control advocates say, is why any arms trade treaty must regulate both military and civilian weapons. Keene said the NRA would actively participate in the fight against the arms trade treaty in the run-up to the March negotiations. "We will be involved," he warned, adding that it was not clear if the NRA would address U.N. delegates directly as the group did in July. The NRA has successfully lobbied members of Congress to stop major new gun restrictions in the United States since the 1994 assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. It also gives financial backing to pro-gun candidates. EXPLOSIVE ISSUE European and other U.N. delegates who support the arms trade treaty told Reuters on condition of anonymity they hoped Newtown would boost support for the convention in the United States, where gun control is an explosive political issue. "Newtown has opened the debate within the United States on weapons controls in ways that it has not been opened in the past," Abramson said, adding that "the conversation within the U.S. will give the (Obama) administration more leeway." Keene rejected the idea of bringing the Newtown tragedy into the discussion of an arms trade treaty. "I find it interesting that some of the folks that advocate the treaty say it would have no impact whatever within the United States but that it needs to be passed to prevent another occurrence of a school shooting such as took place in Newtown," he said. "Both of those positions can't be correct." Obama administration officials have tried to explain to U.S. opponents of the arms trade pact that the treaty under discussion would not affect domestic gun sales and ownership. "Our objectives for the ATT (arms trade treaty) have not changed," a U.S. official told Reuters. "We seek a treaty that fights illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have articulated throughout." "In particular, we will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens to bear arms," the official added. Supporters of the treaty also worry that major arms producers like Russia, China, Iran, India, Pakistan and others could seek to render the treaty toothless by including loopholes and making key provisions voluntary, rather than mandatory. The United States, like all other U.N. member states, can effectively veto the treaty since the negotiations will be conducted on the basis of consensus. That means the treaty must receive unanimous support in order to be approved in March. But if it fails in March, U.N. delegations can put it to a vote in the 193-nation General Assembly, where diplomats say it would likely secure the required two-thirds majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 President Obama in an interview on NBC's Meet the Press pushed for gun control legislation in 2013 and is not sold on the NRA proposal of armed school guards. And in the aftermath of December's deadly elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the president vowed to put his "full weight" behind the gun violence recommendations he asked Vice President Joe Biden to generate. ... Obama said that battle would also be fought during the first year of his second term, the success of which the president suggested would hinge upon just how searing the deadly shooting was to the public psyche. "Will there be resistance? Absolutely there will be resistance," the president told NBC's David Gregory. "And the question then becomes whether we are actually shook up enough by what happened here that it does not just become another one of these routine episodes where it gets a lot of attention for a couple of weeks and then it drifts away. It certainly won't feel like that to me. This is something that was the worst day of my presidency. And it's not something that I want to see repeated." Obama also said he was "skeptical" of the National Rifle Association's proposal to put an armed guard in every school, though he said he would not "prejudge" any proposals to address mass shooting events. http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/30/16239613-immigration-and-gun-violence-top-presidents-post-fiscal-cliff-agenda?lite Here is the full transcript of the interview: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50314590#.UOCcleTAcrU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted January 1, 2013 Share Posted January 1, 2013 Agree just about entirely with Ron Paul. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/24/ron-paul-rips-nra-plan-for-officers-in-every-school/ Ron Paul rips NRA plan for officers in every school Retiring Republican Rep. Ron Paul pushed back Monday against the National Rifle Association's call for installing armed officers in every school, warning that the move could create a TSA-style maze of checkpoints and surveillance cameras -- with limited effect. "School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America," Paul said in a written statement. The congressman, among the most libertarian-leaning on the Hill, is the first Republican in Congress to forcefully oppose the NRA's proposal. NRA head Wayne LaPierre on Friday urged federal funding to overhaul America's school security, a plan that would include posting a guard in every school. LaPierre argued that, in the wake of the Connecticut mass murders, it only makes sense to protect students the same way the country protects banks and elected leaders -- with armed security. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," he said. But Paul -- who said he agrees that "more guns equals less crime" and "private gun ownership prevents many shootings" -- nevertheless chided the NRA for its plan, describing it as a government solution that could infringe on liberty. "Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided 'security,' a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse," Paul said. Paul, during his more than two decades in Congress and three presidential runs, has earned a reputation for going against the grain of his party. He has been famously anti-defense spending and anti-anything that smacks of too much government. While chastising Democrats for their renewed calls for gun control, he claimed the call for more school officers is in the same vein. "Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control. This is understandable, but misguided. The impulse to have government 'do something' to protect us in the wake national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned," Paul said. "The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence. If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we're told, would-be school shooters will be dissuaded or stopped." He continued: "I don't agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence. Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions, and peaceful cooperation through markets." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 ^^^^ Translation: Do nothing. Everything's peachy. The occasional murder of innocent children is a small price to pay for our "freedom".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 ^^^^ Translation: Do nothing. Everything's peachy. The occasional murder of innocent children is a small price to pay for our "freedom".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 ^^^^ Translation: Do nothing. Everything's peachy. The occasional murder of innocent children is a small price to pay for our "freedom".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuckNuckNucks Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Sickening how Lefties use the death of all those children and teachers to push their liberal agendas. And here was Obama exaggerating his eye flicks as if we can actually see his crocadile tears. But blubbers like a baby at HQ when he won the election. How about the thousands of murdered innocent little souls that will never see Kindergarten because the Left voted them out with abortion? It's OK with them. Out of sight out of mind right? The media will never show gladbags full of baby parts being tied up and disposed of. They disrespect the dead Sandy Hook children with their fake tears. Adam Lanza is a Saint compared to the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Fatigue Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Sickening how Lefties use the death of all those children and teachers to push their liberal agendas. And here was Obama exaggerating his eye flicks as if we can actually see his crocadile tears. But blubbers like a baby at HQ when he won the election. How about the thousands of murdered innocent little souls that will never see Kindergarten because the Left voted them out with abortion? It's OK with them. Out of sight out of mind right? The media will never show gladbags full of baby parts being tied up and disposed of. They disrespect the dead Sandy Hook children with their fake tears. Adam Lanza is a Saint compared to the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Fatigue Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 zaibatsu................. /index.php?app=forums&module=forums§ion=findpost&pid=11023587">theminister, on 21 December 2012 - 04:37 PM, said: You've laid out your normal rhetoric here, zaibatsu, but please explain the above. You say it isn't the guns and gun culture that is responsible for Yanks killing Yanks yet you have failed to explain what is. I think after reading your denial of everybody else's opinion I think it's only fair you actually tell us WTF is wrong with America. GO. - Why have you refused to respond to 'theminister' ? I think all of us contributing to this thread are waiting... STILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.