Wayne LaPierre on "Meet The Press" this morning

[alucard0822]

It is illegal in the district to possess a "large capacity ammunition feeding device."

From the article:
Washington police are investigating whether NBC's David Gregory broke the law by holding up what appeared to be a 30-round gun magazine on Sunday's Meet the Press despite being denied permission by police to bring the weaponry on the show.

LOL, this could be epic irony
also:

Gregory held up what looked like a 30-bullet gun magazine

hey, could be worse, could have called it a "clip", one of their experts must have come up with that one

 

[MS2k]

Perfect time to prove a point.

Unless it was a prop, David Gregory was in possession of magazine illegal in DC. Either they charge him as they would/should anybody else, or they prove that they are unwilling to enforce the current gun control laws.

 

[drthv8r]

I agree with you 110%. But if this pinko liberal anti-gun nut job is waving a 30 round magazine in the air and saying "So here is a magazine for ammunition that carries 30 bullets" it's hard to argue that it's a prop.

Perfect time to prove a point.

Unless it was a prop, David Gregory was in possession of magazine illegal in DC. Either they charge him as they would/should anybody else, or they prove that they are unwilling to enforce the current gun control laws.

 

[drthv8r]

Ay!

I motion to start a petition to make Graham Governor of Maryland. All in favor, say "Ay!"

 

[Wheelbrain]

Read up. Dianne Feinstein's proposed AWB ban in detail.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

Here's a real gem:

Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic.

 

[Haides]

Read up. Dianne Feinstein's proposed AWB ban in detail.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

Here's a real gem:

Are they seriously trying to say that the original AWB was effective now?

And what's with this "1 in 4 police officers are killed with assault weapons" crap? I don't have any numbers, but my gut tells me that's bull.

 

[Machodoc]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this. You will no doubt, once more, ignore what I'm saying and proceed with name-calling, etc. If that happens, I'll leave you guys to continue playing together in your own sound-proof chamber. I'm only posting this so that someone else might read it and know where I'm coming from.

You guys are arguing from your beliefs and core values. I'm good with that, and I respect it. I've repeatedly told you that you are right, but that this is a time to be smart.

You refuse to listen, and insist that anything that someone else posts must mean that they are arguing from their own beliefs and core values ... so you attack those without listening. Here's the real deal.

I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

You keep insisting that I show you facts that will support "my position" and want this to be a matter of your values vs. mine. I've told you that my values are the same as yours ... and you don't listen. Instead, everything has to be a them-against-us situation with you few guys. I'm not trying to give you my own values. I'm trying to tell you, as a professional in the field, what's going on.

Do you get that? I'm showing you what the cold, hard, point spread is on the game that we're in.

Your charts and statistics showing trends up through 2011 are meaningless. What counts right now is what's happened in the last two weeks. Got that? Facts are secondary if people insist on acting while emotions are high. Facts don't matter to a lynch mob.

Perception functions as reality, and right now the perception of the majority of Americans (a 7% majority, based on the same article that you cited for other purposes) is that gun control should take precedent over 2A rights. That's their perception, not mine, I'm just looking at the facts from a neutral standpoint.

People in power who want to bring about a change look for situations like this to make that change happen. Without them, change is slow and incremental. It's like one person trying to drag a blimp around by a rope. In still air, you'll hardly move it at all. If the wind blows against you, you'll lose ground. But if the wind happens to come up that's blowing in the direction you want, you run like hell with it.

Right now, a strong wind of opinion is blowing in favor of gun control, and even among gun owners the don't-give-an-inch mindset is not unanimous. The antis are pissing themselves to act as soon as possible, and to fan the flames of tragedy until they can ram something through. Got that concept? Even though it's not what you want, and it doesn't fit your beliefs and facts, do you not see that's what the situation is at the moment?

OK ... as soon as congress gets back into session, there are two two issues that they are going to focus on. One is the so-called "fiscal cliff," and the other is gun control. There are those antis who are even going to use the economic issues sidetrack some congressional 2A supporters. Worse yet, don't be amazed if someone tries to put gun control as a rider onto an economic bill. That's how the game is played.

Here's what's going to happen in the short term. A ban on high-capacity magazines is going to sail through congress. Will that do anything to stem gun violence? We all know that the answer to that is a resounding, "NO!" But will if make the frightened public think that the Feinbergbloomsteins are in there taking swift and decisive action to get rid of the evil guns? Yep. And it will get them support and votes, and that's all they are interested in in the first place. It's low-hanging fruit. They've been banned before, and the majority of Americans (even gun owners) weren't affected by it.

What will happen with so-called "assault weapons"? That depends on how this gets played out. If we can buy some time until the mob mentality cools off enough for meaningful statistics to be introduced, maybe bans on not only "assault weapons," but perhaps even all firearms, can be avoided ... and the easiest way to buy that time is to engage in a long discussion over hi-cap magazines, even if that means giving in on them, and slowing down the winds of American emotions. Gee ... the NRA is part of the solution. They must not be so bad after all. We're going to at least face high-capacity mag bans, so we either steer that particular lemon to our own lemonade stand (perhaps without as much sugar as we'd like), or we let the the Bloomsteinfeinbergers shove lemons down our throats.

When make something into an "All, or nothing!" situation, remember that there's always a chance that you'll end up with nothing.

OK ... go back to the name calling, etc., etc. Accuse me of being a plant for the enemy because I don't sing the same song, line and verse, that you want everyone to. Again, I'm not expressing my own emotional desires here, nor am I expressing my core values. I'm only looking at the numbers and calculating the point spread. Given that--and as much as I wish it were NOT true--the power is on the antis' side of the field. Let's hope that our own coaches know how to manage the clock until they can get the ball back into our hands.

 

[Maverick0313]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this. You will no doubt, once more, ignore what I'm saying and proceed with name-calling, etc. If that happens, I'll leave you guys to continue playing together in your own sound-proof chamber. I'm only posting this so that someone else might read it and know where I'm coming from.

You guys are arguing from your beliefs and core values. I'm good with that, and I respect it. I've repeatedly told you that you are right, but that this is a time to be smart.

You refuse to listen, and insist that anything that someone else posts must mean that they are arguing from their own beliefs and core values ... so you attack those without listening. Here's the real deal.

I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

You keep insisting that I show you facts that will support "my position" and want this to be a matter of your values vs. mine. I've told you that my values are the same as yours ... and you don't listen. Instead, everything has to be a them-against-us situation with you few guys. I'm not trying to give you my own values. I'm trying to tell you, as a professional in the field, what's going on.

Do you get that? I'm showing you what the cold, hard, point spread is on the game that we're in.

Your charts and statistics showing trends up through 2011 are meaningless. What counts right now is what's happened in the last two weeks. Got that? Facts are secondary if people insist on acting while emotions are high. Facts don't matter to a lynch mob.

Perception functions as reality, and right now the perception of the majority of Americans (a 7% majority, based on the same article that you cited for other purposes) is that gun control should take precedent over 2A rights. That's their perception, not mine, I'm just looking at the facts from a neutral standpoint.

People in power who want to bring about a change look for situations like this to make that change happen. Without them, change is slow and incremental. It's like one person trying to drag a blimp around by a rope. In still air, you'll hardly move it at all. If the wind blows against you, you'll lose ground. But if the wind happens to come up that's blowing in the direction you want, you run like hell with it.

Right now, a strong wind of opinion is blowing in favor of gun control, and even among gun owners the don't-give-an-inch mindset is not unanimous. The antis are pissing themselves to act as soon as possible, and to fan the flames of tragedy until they can ram something through. Got that concept? Even though it's not what you want, and it doesn't fit your beliefs and facts, do you not see that's what the situation is at the moment?

OK ... as soon as congress gets back into session, there are two two issues that they are going to focus on. One is the so-called "fiscal cliff," and the other is gun control. There are those antis who are even going to use the economic issues sidetrack some congressional 2A supporters. Worse yet, don't be amazed if someone tries to put gun control as a rider onto an economic bill. That's how the game is played.

Here's what's going to happen in the short term. A ban on high-capacity magazines is going to sail through congress. Will that do anything to stem gun violence? We all know that the answer to that is a resounding, "NO!" But will if make the frightened public think that the Feinbergbloomsteins are in there taking swift and decisive action to get rid of the evil guns? Yep. And it will get them support and votes, and that's all they are interested in in the first place. It's low-hanging fruit. They've been banned before, and the majority of Americans (even gun owners) weren't affected by it.

What will happen with so-called "assault weapons"? That depends on how this gets played out. If we can buy some time until the mob mentality cools off enough for meaningful statistics to be introduced, maybe bans on not only "assault weapons," but perhaps even all firearms, can be avoided ... and the easiest way to buy that time is to engage in a long discussion over hi-cap magazines, even if that means giving in on them.

OK ... go back to the name calling, etc., etc. Accuse me of being a plant for the enemy, because I don't sing the same song, line and verse, that you want everyone to. Again, I'm not expressing my own emotional desires here, nor am I expressing my core values. I'm only looking at the numbers and calculating the point spread. Given that--and as much as I wish it were NOT true--the power is on the antis' side of the field. Let's hope that our own coaches know how to manage the clock until they can get the ball back into our hands.

Well said. I would only add that I have spent SOME time over the past two weeks explaining to what one could consider intelligent people the difference between automatic, and semi-automatic. I was somewhat disappointed while TDY in San Diego last week that many of the people that engaged in discussions over the shootings did not understand the significance of this and further, that they had gone from a position of "to each his own" to the far opposite. You are correct in stating that this is not the time to try and push back at EVERY attempt of our political "leaders"; they HAVE to show their constituents SOMETHING. We need to keep our sanity and play this game to the best that we can. Keep the faith.

 

[jpk1md]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this.

Good, I'm glad I won't have to repeat myself to you too.

I've been at this game for a good while.

I've written a lot of letters and spoken with a lot of politicians and their aides over the years

I've spent a lot of time at hearings presenting the facts over and over and over and each time Facts trump Feelings all day, every day....this time is no different.

I've ALREADY had this conversation with a couple of state politicians up here who were waffling and they too have come back to their senses BASED UPON THE FACTS.

Once again you come forth with the position that Feelings trump Facts and thats simply not the case.

So please take your cheese eating surrender monkey feelings and SHOVE IT.

The solution is to CONTINUE to present the facts and make politicians understand that inanimate object bans change nothing for the better and in ever case MAKES THEM WORSE.

Combine that with a healthy dose of promise to fund a primary challenger in the next election and this bill isnt going anywhere.

Every seat in the House is up for re-election in 2014 and believe it or not those campaigns have already started........the re-election of MANY of these critters will be based on whether or not they do the right thing or capitulate.

If you have any doubts as to whether or not there are sufficient people to enforce these outcomes just look at gun/ammo sales the last couple weeks.......gun owners are not forgiving voters.

 

[MDMOUNTAINEER]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this. You will no doubt, once more, ignore what I'm saying and proceed with name-calling, etc. If that happens, I'll leave you guys to continue playing together in your own sound-proof chamber. I'm only posting this so that someone else might read it and know where I'm coming from.

You guys are arguing from your beliefs and core values. I'm good with that, and I respect it. I've repeatedly told you that you are right, but that this is a time to be smart.

You refuse to listen, and insist that anything that someone else posts must mean that they are arguing from their own beliefs and core values ... so you attack those without listening. Here's the real deal.

I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

You keep insisting that I show you facts that will support "my position" and want this to be a matter of your values vs. mine. I've told you that my values are the same as yours ... and you don't listen. Instead, everything has to be a them-against-us situation with you few guys. I'm not trying to give you my own values. I'm trying to tell you, as a professional in the field, what's going on.

Do you get that? I'm showing you what the cold, hard, point spread is on the game that we're in.

Your charts and statistics showing trends up through 2011 are meaningless. What counts right now is what's happened in the last two weeks. Got that? Facts are secondary if people insist on acting while emotions are high. Facts don't matter to a lynch mob.

Perception functions as reality, and right now the perception of the majority of Americans (a 7% majority, based on the same article that you cited for other purposes) is that gun control should take precedent over 2A rights. That's their perception, not mine, I'm just looking at the facts from a neutral standpoint.

People in power who want to bring about a change look for situations like this to make that change happen. Without them, change is slow and incremental. It's like one person trying to drag a blimp around by a rope. In still air, you'll hardly move it at all. If the wind blows against you, you'll lose ground. But if the wind happens to come up that's blowing in the direction you want, you run like hell with it.

Right now, a strong wind of opinion is blowing in favor of gun control, and even among gun owners the don't-give-an-inch mindset is not unanimous. The antis are pissing themselves to act as soon as possible, and to fan the flames of tragedy until they can ram something through. Got that concept? Even though it's not what you want, and it doesn't fit your beliefs and facts, do you not see that's what the situation is at the moment?

OK ... as soon as congress gets back into session, there are two two issues that they are going to focus on. One is the so-called "fiscal cliff," and the other is gun control. There are those antis who are even going to use the economic issues sidetrack some congressional 2A supporters. Worse yet, don't be amazed if someone tries to put gun control as a rider onto an economic bill. That's how the game is played.

Here's what's going to happen in the short term. A ban on high-capacity magazines is going to sail through congress. Will that do anything to stem gun violence? We all know that the answer to that is a resounding, "NO!" But will if make the frightened public think that the Feinbergbloomsteins are in there taking swift and decisive action to get rid of the evil guns? Yep. And it will get them support and votes, and that's all they are interested in in the first place. It's low-hanging fruit. They've been banned before, and the majority of Americans (even gun owners) weren't affected by it.

What will happen with so-called "assault weapons"? That depends on how this gets played out. If we can buy some time until the mob mentality cools off enough for meaningful statistics to be introduced, maybe bans on not only "assault weapons," but perhaps even all firearms, can be avoided ... and the easiest way to buy that time is to engage in a long discussion over hi-cap magazines, even if that means giving in on them, and slowing down the winds of American emotions. Gee ... the NRA is part of the solution. They must not be so bad after all. We're going to at least face high-capacity mag bans, so we either steer that particular lemon to our own lemonade stand (perhaps without as much sugar as we'd like), or we let the the Bloomsteinfeinbergers shove lemons down our throats.

When make something into an "All, or nothing!" situation, remember that there's always a chance that you'll end up with nothing.

OK ... go back to the name calling, etc., etc. Accuse me of being a plant for the enemy because I don't sing the same song, line and verse, that you want everyone to. Again, I'm not expressing my own emotional desires here, nor am I expressing my core values. I'm only looking at the numbers and calculating the point spread. Given that--and as much as I wish it were NOT true--the power is on the antis' side of the field. Let's hope that our own coaches know how to manage the clock until they can get the ball back into our hands.

I've read all of your posts as well as all of jpk1md's post. I don't always agree with jpk1md, but in this case I do.

Your position is not one that I support. I do believe your position to be wholly defeatist posturing heavily reliant on the emotional component instead of actually redirecting the focus based on facts. This is what jpk has been trying to say all along.

While you may be prepared to accept what you consider "acceptable loss" related new new legislative restrictions or "bans", I am not okay with that. I would hope that all gun owners would take that line. The FACTS simply do not, have never, and will never show these legislative restrictions effective at solving any problem, real or perceived.

The fact that you continuously assert these defeatist concessions as reasonable, offends me. The fact that you could potentially sway others in the 2A community to this line of thinking, while claiming to be a 2A supporter, works against both my beliefs (and obviously the beliefs of others) and is fundamentally problematic for me. Your position is completely at odds with everything the Second Amendment stands for.

I like how you state your training and education in a related field. Are you really so arrogant to think it matters? Do you really believe you are more intelligent than others on this board? Do you really think this education you claim makes your position more viable?

I'll re-state: Your position is caustic, fact-less, and works to undermine the Second Amendment in a manner consistent with the anti-gun logic.

Good, I'm glad I won't have to repeat myself to you too.

I've been at this game for a good while.

I've written a lot of letters and spoken with a lot of politicians and their aides over the years

I've spent a lot of time at hearings presenting the facts over and over and over and each time Facts trump Feelings all day, every day....this time is no different.

I've ALREADY had this conversation with a couple of state politicians up here who were waffling and they too have come back to their senses BASED UPON THE FACTS.

Once again you come forth with the position that Feelings trump Facts and thats simply not the case.

So please take your cheese eating surrender monkey feelings and SHOVE IT.

The solution is to CONTINUE to present the facts and make politicians understand that inanimate object bans change nothing for the better and in ever case MAKES THEM WORSE.

Combine that with a healthy dose of promise to fund a primary challenger in the next election and this bill isnt going anywhere.

Every seat in the House is up for re-election in 2014 and believe it or not those campaigns have already started........the re-election of MANY of these critters will be based on whether or not they do the right thing or capitulate.

If you have any doubts as to whether or not there are sufficient people to enforce these outcomes just look at gun/ammo sales the last couple weeks.......gun owners are not forgiving voters.

 

[04RWon]

I agree with jpk1md


Making compromises in this situation is not cool. Basically its like our rights are a tree, and we will allow the anti's to get a few swings of the axe but not chop it down. Its still damage and it still weakens us. Its still movement towards taking all of our 2A rights away. They cant be allowed to continue to chip away, eventually, after we have kept "compromising" all the right will be gone.

 

[JMintzer]

Good, I'm glad I won't have to repeat myself to you too.

I've been at this game for a good while.

I've written a lot of letters and spoken with a lot of politicians and their aides over the years

I've spent a lot of time at hearings presenting the facts over and over and over and each time Facts trump Feelings all day, every day....this time is no different.

I've ALREADY had this conversation with a couple of state politicians up here who were waffling and they too have come back to their senses BASED UPON THE FACTS.

Once again you come forth with the position that Feelings trump Facts and thats simply not the case.

So please take your cheese eating surrender monkey feelings and SHOVE IT.

The solution is to CONTINUE to present the facts and make politicians understand that inanimate object bans change nothing for the better and in ever case MAKES THEM WORSE.

Combine that with a healthy dose of promise to fund a primary challenger in the next election and this bill isnt going anywhere.

Every seat in the House is up for re-election in 2014 and believe it or not those campaigns have already started........the re-election of MANY of these critters will be based on whether or not they do the right thing or capitulate.

If you have any doubts as to whether or not there are sufficient people to enforce these outcomes just look at gun/ammo sales the last couple weeks.......gun owners are not forgiving voters.

If feelings don't trump facts, how did the "assault weapons ban" pass the first time?

 

[Huckleberry]

You initially negotiate from your positions of strength, not weakness.

Compromise is your fallback position when you fail to convince your opponents or their argument is stronger.

Compromise and backroom political skullduggery helped the NRA to get the sunset provision slipped into the Clinton AWB, unfortunately that won't work with the Antis this time since they are not going to be fooled twice.

 

[hvymax]

I agree with jpk1md


Making compromises in this situation is not cool. Basically its like our rights are a tree, and we will allow the anti's to get a few swings of the axe but not chop it down. Its still damage and it still weakens us. Its still movement towards taking all of our 2A rights away. They cant be allowed to continue to chip away, eventually, after we have kept "compromising" all the right will be gone.

Mags today, pistol grips tomorrow, registration next week, confiscation next year. Kind of like Israel negotiating with those whose only acceptable solution is their extinction. We are coming to that point here as well and the question is will we be disarmed before THEY round US up?

 

[jpk1md]

If feelings don't trump facts, how did the "assault weapons ban" pass the first time?

Partly because it got lumped into an onmibus crime bill as I recall

Largely because the NRA capitulated

But PRIMARILY because Gun Owners were largely unaware because the "Internet" as we know it didn't exist and people relied on MSM (ie media wing of socialist party) to get their information.

Today we are fed information in real time and its VERY difficult for politicians to escape extreme scrutiny.....this is a good thing and obviously works to our favor that Lamestream Media has a VERY hard time censor the information we get and controlling the discussion.

People need to remember that we're in control here and the biggest club we wield is the threat of a primary challenge.

Politicians are getting the word that a growing number of people are fed up....so fed up that they are willing to fund primary challenges EVEN if it means we lose the race to unseat some big gov progressive......you don't have to look far to see the impact that grass roots pro liberty primary challenges have had in cleaning up the gene pool so to speak....last weeks revolt against Boehner was this grass roots pressure in action......and its the same thing we need to apply in the case of irrational gun control.

The threat of a primary challenge doesn't end at the primary.....it has the impact of weakening the incumbent sufficiently to the point where they don't have the funds/support to mount a re-election campaign against the other party in the actual election....and again....you don't have to look far for examples of this in action

The lifetime political class that has up until this point in time thought they were largely immune from this is TERRIFIED of this challenge to their power and will do most anything to AVOID a primary challenge because too often it spells doom for re-election prospects.

Our most powerful tool is the promise of a primary challenge to ANY politician (Rep or Dem) that fails to defend our rights.

 

[StickerLT]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this. You will no doubt, once more, ignore what I'm saying and proceed with name-calling, etc. If that happens, I'll leave you guys to continue playing together in your own sound-proof chamber. I'm only posting this so that someone else might read it and know where I'm coming from.

You guys are arguing from your beliefs and core values. I'm good with that, and I respect it. I've repeatedly told you that you are right, but that this is a time to be smart.

You refuse to listen, and insist that anything that someone else posts must mean that they are arguing from their own beliefs and core values ... so you attack those without listening. Here's the real deal.

I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

You keep insisting that I show you facts that will support "my position" and want this to be a matter of your values vs. mine. I've told you that my values are the same as yours ... and you don't listen. Instead, everything has to be a them-against-us situation with you few guys. I'm not trying to give you my own values. I'm trying to tell you, as a professional in the field, what's going on.

Do you get that? I'm showing you what the cold, hard, point spread is on the game that we're in.

Your charts and statistics showing trends up through 2011 are meaningless. What counts right now is what's happened in the last two weeks. Got that? Facts are secondary if people insist on acting while emotions are high. Facts don't matter to a lynch mob.

Perception functions as reality, and right now the perception of the majority of Americans (a 7% majority, based on the same article that you cited for other purposes) is that gun control should take precedent over 2A rights. That's their perception, not mine, I'm just looking at the facts from a neutral standpoint.

People in power who want to bring about a change look for situations like this to make that change happen. Without them, change is slow and incremental. It's like one person trying to drag a blimp around by a rope. In still air, you'll hardly move it at all. If the wind blows against you, you'll lose ground. But if the wind happens to come up that's blowing in the direction you want, you run like hell with it.

Right now, a strong wind of opinion is blowing in favor of gun control, and even among gun owners the don't-give-an-inch mindset is not unanimous. The antis are pissing themselves to act as soon as possible, and to fan the flames of tragedy until they can ram something through. Got that concept? Even though it's not what you want, and it doesn't fit your beliefs and facts, do you not see that's what the situation is at the moment?

OK ... as soon as congress gets back into session, there are two two issues that they are going to focus on. One is the so-called "fiscal cliff," and the other is gun control. There are those antis who are even going to use the economic issues sidetrack some congressional 2A supporters. Worse yet, don't be amazed if someone tries to put gun control as a rider onto an economic bill. That's how the game is played.

Here's what's going to happen in the short term. A ban on high-capacity magazines is going to sail through congress. Will that do anything to stem gun violence? We all know that the answer to that is a resounding, "NO!" But will if make the frightened public think that the Feinbergbloomsteins are in there taking swift and decisive action to get rid of the evil guns? Yep. And it will get them support and votes, and that's all they are interested in in the first place. It's low-hanging fruit. They've been banned before, and the majority of Americans (even gun owners) weren't affected by it.

What will happen with so-called "assault weapons"? That depends on how this gets played out. If we can buy some time until the mob mentality cools off enough for meaningful statistics to be introduced, maybe bans on not only "assault weapons," but perhaps even all firearms, can be avoided ... and the easiest way to buy that time is to engage in a long discussion over hi-cap magazines, even if that means giving in on them, and slowing down the winds of American emotions. Gee ... the NRA is part of the solution. They must not be so bad after all. We're going to at least face high-capacity mag bans, so we either steer that particular lemon to our own lemonade stand (perhaps without as much sugar as we'd like), or we let the the Bloomsteinfeinbergers shove lemons down our throats.

When make something into an "All, or nothing!" situation, remember that there's always a chance that you'll end up with nothing.

OK ... go back to the name calling, etc., etc. Accuse me of being a plant for the enemy because I don't sing the same song, line and verse, that you want everyone to. Again, I'm not expressing my own emotional desires here, nor am I expressing my core values. I'm only looking at the numbers and calculating the point spread. Given that--and as much as I wish it were NOT true--the power is on the antis' side of the field. Let's hope that our own coaches know how to manage the clock until they can get the ball back into our hands.

Not aware or following the argument between you guys, but agree with your premise. The MSM has been and will hammer the Amercian publc 24/7 and the anti-gun politicians have and will take full advantage of it. Look at the supposedly pro-gun folks on the tube, family and friends, asking "why do we need....AR/hi Hi-Cap Mags...etc."
We need to have a discussion, but "We" our reps need to stop taking the bait and letting the gun control side define the argument/topic. I don;t have the background, training, or education that you do, but I have paid attention for quite a few years....my humble opinion is we're in for the fight of our lives.

That being said, I don't like the idea of going along with some things to pacify or buy time, seems a precedent will be set and then the next mass killing using a ______(fill in the blank) results in that particular inanimate object being banned.

 

[Silverlode]

JPK and Silverlode -

This is the last time that I'm going to try to say this.

Good. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, you are still wrong.

You will no doubt, once more, ignore what I'm saying and proceed with name-calling, etc. If that happens, I'll leave you guys to continue playing together in your own sound-proof chamber.

Nobody ignored you and I don't recall anyone directly calling you names. If the names apply to you, so be it. Go back and reference your wise crack about teaching pigs to sing, it is no different.

I'm only posting this so that someone else might read it and know where I'm coming from.

The only reason I continue to respond is so that newbies to this cause, and people who's minds are not made up on the matter see your foolishness for what it is. The cause needs your ilk about as much as I need a third nipple. I'm not sure what the first two are for.

You refuse to listen...

Wrong. Typical response from liberals. I hear your BS and I don't agree with it. That means I didn't listen? I have seen your song and dance ad nauseum.

This is a time to be smart.

I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

There is nothing smart about surrendering God given rights You still can't grasp that. One thing is clear. You love to hear yourself talk and fancy yourself of elite intelligence. Typical liberal behaviour.

I don't care what your training is. To me, "I work as a policy development professional" translates to " I am a community organizer", or "I am a political weasel", or "I am an elitist who thinks I am smarter than everyone else including the founding fathers".

You keep insisting that I show you facts that will support "my position" and want this to be a matter of your values vs. mine. I've told you that my values are the same as yours ...

I'm still waiting to see how surrendering guns rights will make a difference. Further, I don't care if they do. The bill of rights isn't up for negotiation, period. Your values aren't even close to mine. Tell us who you voted for in the last 4-5 elections.

I'm trying to tell you, as a professional in the field, what's going on.

Do you get that? I'm showing you what the cold, hard, point spread is on the game that we're in.

You aren't showing me jack sh!t I don't already know. This is a major difference between you and I if your values truly are what mine are as you claim. I am not going to wither in the face of opposition. For you, too many people don't like what you supposedly stand for, so you want to start conceding things that don't make a difference. How about you grab a pair and stand up for what is right despite it's unpopularity?

I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your post. It's just more condescending drivel from someone who clearly fancies himself an intellectual as I have already stated. You are wrong, your plan is wrong and it is based on a premise that is faulty to begin with. No doubt you will go on thinking many disagree with you because they won't listen.

 

[jpk1md]

Looky looky.....while the cheese eating surrender monkey contingency has been wringing their hands looking for an opportunity to capitulate it appears that Facts are prevailing and the expected emotional response is subsiding and giving way to upper brain function.

Front page of one of the more liberal rags out there.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...ghter-gun-laws-but-oppose-assault-weapons-ban

The title is actually deceptive but that shouldn't come as any surprise

Fifty-one percent oppose re-instating the federal ban on assault weapons, with 44 percent supporting the move. That is almost (un) changed from 2011, when the public opposed the weapons ban by a 53-43 split.

The poll was conducted from Dec. 19-22 and has a 4-point margin of error

This poll started just a few days after the incident.

Count on future polls showing decreasing support for useless legislation that won't accomplish anything as upper brain function continues to reassert itself over emotional responses.

 

[Huckleberry]

The NRA didn't capitulate in 94, the. NRA didn't have the votes. Even Harry Reid voted against the bill but we had GOP that supported the measure.

NRA had a losing hand and they played it pretty well. Didn't hear anybody complaining when the Sunset kicked-in March 2004.

 

[jpk1md]

The NRA didn't capitulate in 94, the. NRA didn't have the votes. Even Harry Reid voted against the bill but we had GOP that supported the measure.

NRA had a losing hand and they played it pretty well. Didn't hear anybody complaining when the Sunset kicked-in March 2004.

Sure they did....the fight the NRA put up was limp wristed at best and despite the significant lead time we had on the legislation they failed to mount a grass roots campaign against the AWB

Instead they took the classic "We Know Best" approach and look what we got.

This "Top Down" approach to the NRA is fundamentally the problem and they CONTINUE to advertise this approach in their propaganda....that the NRA will defend your rights.....partially true but the message they send is that if you donate the the NRA you're good to go and don't need to do anything else.

Most of us know this is patently false and a losing formula