More of these immigrants please . . . Fabio’s Advice to Americans: ‘Don’t Ever Give up Your Guns’ – “Based on his experiences living in Europe and the ‘out-of-control’ problems now being committed in the name of liberalism in California, model and actor Fabio warns Americans, “Don’t ever give up your guns.” He suggests liberals have divided people and are using the split to push their freedom-crushing agenda . . . “Don’t you ever give up your guns. If people lose that right, forget about it. Politicians — they will take everything away from you. And then what are you going to do, protest with a rock? Because that’s what they do in Europe.”
This again . . . Islamic State magazine steers followers to U.S. gun shows for ‘easy’ access to weapons – “In the most recent issue of Rumiyah, its glossy multilingual propaganda magazine, the Islamic State encouraged recruits in the United States to take advantage of laws that allow people to buy firearms without having to present identification or submit to background checks. Recruits should seek out gun shows and online sales in particular . . . ‘The acquisition of firearms can be very simple depending on one’s geographical location,’ the piece read. ‘In most U.S. states, anything from a single-shot shotgun all the way up to a semi-automatic AR-15 rifle can be purchased at showrooms or through online sales — by way of private dealers — with no background checks, and without requiring either an ID or a gun license.’ ‘With approximately 5,000 gun shows taking place annually within the United States,’ it added, ‘the acquisition of firearms becomes a very easy matter.'” Trucks too!
This is like Newtown families suing Bushmaster or the Indy cop who sued the store that sold the gun to the hood who shot him . . . Families sue Facebook, Twitter, Google over San Bernardino attack – “Family members of San Bernardino terror attack victims sued Facebook, Google and Twitter, accusing the companies of providing platforms that help the Islamic State group spread propaganda, recruit followers and raise money. The lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court in Los Angeles alleges that the companies aided and abetted terrorism, provided material support to terrorist groups and are liable for the wrongful deaths of three of the 14 victims killed in the Dec. 2, 2015, attack on a health department training event and holiday party.”
Can’t let a conflicting viewpoint contradict the narrative . . . Daily newspaper columnist who defended NRA quits after suspension – “A conservative columnist who was suspended by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch after she defended the National Rifle Association from comparisons to ISIS fired back with her resignation and a series of targeted tweets. The newspaper on Friday suspended Stacy Washington after a column entitled “Guns and the Media” disputed an anti-NRA article that argued since more Americans die from guns than from ISIS, the Second Amendment advocacy group is the greater danger.” Diversity is great, until someone expresses a dissenting opinion.
Choose your instructor carefully . . . Michigan firearms instructor accidentally shoots student in both legs – “Police say a firearm instructor could face charges after he accidentally discharged his weapon and shot a student during a training class Saturday. The victim was struck in both legs by a single bullet. … The 44-year-old firearms instructor from Farmington Hills was conducting a training class for people hoping to obtain concealed pistol licenses. Another class was underway next door, Nenciarini said.”
Pat Toomey wows the Brady Campaign and Gabby Giffords confab . . . Speaking to gun-safety group, Pat Toomey reaffirms support for background check bill – “‘We have not been successful yet, but my determination has not diminished and one day we’re going to succeed on this (universal background check) bill,’ Toomey told the reception crowd, drawing applause. The event was part of a two-day summit organized by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Americans for Responsible Solutions, a group founded by former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, who was severely injured in a 2011 shooting.” Anti-gun leopards don’t change their spots.
Guns killed Gander Mountain! . . . Camping World CEO says Gander Mountain made a bad bet on guns – “In a conference call to discuss earnings, Camping World Chairman and CEO Marcus Lemonis highlighted what he called a barrage of management mistakes from Gander Mountain that he referred to as ‘stupid.’ The blunt-spoken Lemonis — who stars in “The Profit,” a CNBC reality show — said Gander Mountain overspent on inventory and expanded beyond all common sense into markets where they were cannibalizing their own customer base.”
A case of the whole being less than the sum of its parts. Onward, TOGETHER!
Overpriced guns kept Gander Mountain alive far longer than they would have been if Sandy Hook had never happened.
Another look at the instructor shooting incident:
http://www.guns.com/2017/05/05/detroit-area-firearms-instructor-accidentally-shoots-student/
For the classroom phase of my Michigan CPL class, no ammo was allowed in the room, students guns remained cased on the floor, and the instructors used ‘blue guns’.
If Gander priced their guns competitively then perhaps they would have made more money on guns.
“I’m assuming he thought his gun was unloaded,” Nencarini said.
Well, what does Colonel Cooper say?
Fabio seems cursed to always have wind in his face.
I’m sure he prefers wind over birds in his face. ?
ISIS and terrorist like the Uni-Bomber seem to be in lock step with the libs. They spew the same lies, seem to have the same agendas. John Wayne Gacy was a Dem and had his picture taken with 1st lady Carter. I guess the same mindset. Make the people fear, everything is gonna kill you. The NRA is worse than ISIS. Guns are bad but kill less than doctors, and abortion kills 1 child every 97 seconds.
And I didn’t know I would actually like Fabio’s thinking.
It’s fitting. Every single person I’ve ever known that’s been far left has had some kind of legitimate mental or behavioral condition.
The CIA is doing a great job on the ISIS newsletter; much better than the first ones. Great use of photos and full page bleeds. Good work!
I think this is the funniest thing I’ve seen on this website.
What a bunch of complete and total bullshit.
Want to talk about serial killers and political affiliations ? How about good old Ted Bundy. He was an actual card carrying Republican who actually WORKED for the Republican party. I guess the same mindset.
He was a RINO. He was actually a liberal. Like John McCain. Like you.
Thanks Hellbilly, I feel dumber for having read your moronic post.
Michael is no different than all the other demoldturds, brainless.
Yep Gander sucks. Grossly overpriced and now they won’t even show anything on their “going out of business after 57 years!” Not driving 30 miles to find out. Bravo Fabio! ISIS is as clueless as I expected(stick to trucks idiots). Can somebody HIRE Stacy Washington?!?
“Washington has appeared several times as a co-host and commentator on “Cam & Company” on NRA TV and contributed to an NRA documentary in August 2016. However, she has never been paid by the NRA.” – That might be about to change. She has her own blog. She hosts a nationally syndicated show on Urban Family Talk. I don’t think we get that one. She isn’t out of work.
But it would be a big win for the NRA to get her. It’s hard for the left to go after a black woman on the whole identity politics thing. They’re still going to do it.
Stacy is an STL local with several other jobs. She’ll be fine, regardless of how bubble-headed she sounds on the radio, she has a following.
Stacy Washington was my go to person to find out about what was going on in Ferguson Missouri. She was a regular on the Cam Edwards NRA radio show. The racist white socialist progressives, and racist blacks too, can’t let it be known that black, white and every other color can get along under the umbrella of the second amendment and the NRA.
I really hate the socialist progressive. I don’t care what color they are. They are the devil.
“I really hate the socialist progressive. I don’t care what color they are. They are the devil.”
Word.
I have nothing but contempt for them, and they feel the same way about us. And it’s not going to change.
If it were a marriage, (and it most certainly *is*), that’s known as ‘irreconcilable differences’ and it’s grounds for a divorce.
Perhaps we need a ‘national conversation’ about getting a divorce before the inevitable ‘domestic violence’ starts…
As far as Gun Shows for easy weapons – If I am selling a weapon in a private sale, the purchaser must have a state issued concealed carry permit or be known personally by me for the sale to go through.
Not to mention, if you roll up to a gun show with one of those scruffy, patchy, “wolfman in mid transition” Muhammad beards, rocking your kufi hat with your wife in her all-black beekeeper outfit, you’re probably not going to have quite such an easy time getting someone to sell you an off-the-books gun… Call it profiling if you want, but something tells me a Daesh guy is not going to blend in real naturally with the typical gun show crowd.
Yeah. Gun shows are a GREAT way to acquire weapons for a terrorist attack. There are NEVER any ATFE (and Really Big Fires!) or Effa Bee Eye agents wandering the aisles…
I’ve bought 6 or 7 guns at shows over the past 18 years and every seller required a background check. Maybe I look suspicious. Maybe they were being careful.
And maybe they were FFL and did what the law requires.
The problem is not all states have such laws and even those that do often do not enforce them. In my State you are supposed to show your drivers license but few do and you could easily show a fake or stolen license as well
They sure use a background check in Illinois! NO advantage buying at gunshows here…
I suppose that is one advantage of the mainstream western media presenting one unified wall of sheer bullshit on guns.
“Islamic State magazine steers followers to U.S. gun shows for ‘easy’ access to weapons”
This is a serious misdirection play. While the boys in blue are going all Lt. Columbo on gun shows, the real jihadist are getting their weapons from Ryder Truck Rentals.
Any of those convenience store cashiers who gets Sudden Jihadist Syndrome can borrow a tanker truck of gasoline from Shell or Sunoco.
Word. We need to surveil truck driving schools like we do flying schools. Tanker driver gets out of his cab at a 3 am delivery. Achmet hits him with a bat, steals the tanker, hides it for 6 hours and drives it through the cafeteria wall at GWB Elementary while the kiddies are eating their state-supplied breakfast.
Cause they’re sophisticated enough to know that bombing MLK, Jr Elementary might boomerang on them.
The link about Fabio is an article about the article about his interview. There is a link to the original Lifezette article in the Brietbart article. The last line of the article is a quote from Fabio that is just great: “The day you give up your weapon in the United States, the United States is going to be history.”
“…or the Indy cop who sued the store that sold the gun to the hood who shot him.”
That one was even stupider than that – he sued the store that sold the gun to a guy who sold the gun to yet another guy, who shot the cop.
Ah, St. Louis Post-Dispatch. When it seems you couldn’t possibly become less relevant, you still manage to surprise.
Been the Post Disgrace since before the Globe Democrap was buried 3 decades ago….
Just sayin’.
Actually, I should thank the P-D. Their terrible writing and editing and requisite media bias, along with a haughty J-School professor at Mizzou, helped convince me that print journalism was not the right path for me. My parents were pissed when I dropped out, but it helped push me into a very successful IT career.
Thank you, crap media. Thank you very much.
“Onward, Together!” seems like a strangely incomplete statement based on the source.
“Onward, together Comrades!” would be more apropos.
I saw a Gander Mountain store today that had it’s “going out of business- all product must go- sale sale sale!” signs up. I stopped in and found that the sales in question were for about 10-20% off of clothing which, as everyone knows, is always ridiculously marked up to begin with. And it wasn’t even all the clothes- the 99$ pair of 5.11 pants (that I got for $20 at TJ Max) was untouched by the clearances, as were other brand name items. The guns were not outrageously priced for a box store but they weren’t priced to move, either.
I almost picked up a hiking shirt but then found out that you can’t use the fitting room without summoning an employee with a key so I just walked out.
I’ve been known to strip off my shirt in the middle of the aisle to try something on. However, 1) I’m in great physical shape, and 2) I always wear a t-shirt.
YMMV
I also had a t-shirt but didn’t feel like showing off my bulge to everyone in the area (and by bulge I mean my t-shirt was not loose enough to conceal my firearm)
Plus it just annoys the crap out of me when stores pull that crap. If you’re gonna babysit the fitting room, at least put an employee there to do it.
A simple case of marketing failure. Gander Mountain never had end of the fall/winter hunting season sale. Cabella’s and Dick’s always did. That’s where my money went.
And speaking of box stores, did I miss the story about which stores were in on the deal with Springfield\Rock River in Illinois?
Text of the bill HERE: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=10000SB1657sam001&GA=100&SessionId=91&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=104404&DocNum=1657&GAID=14&Session=
Applicable clause, Sec 19 Exemptions.
19 (13) transfers of firearms by a dealer in which 20% or less
20 of the dealer’s annual sales are from the sale of firearms.
So, that would likely be ANY big box. Sell one shotgun, and 2 Yeti coolers, and the firearm is less than 20% of the total sale.
Sure, you can’t create a law that says “We hereby exempt ‘Dicks’ and ‘Wal Mart’ from these laws.”
But which ones pushed for the exemption and what did they give in exchange?
Yeah where the he!! is THAT? BTW a local FFL(mostly they just do transfers)has stated they will NOT transfer any Springfield or Rock River Arms. Precisely the folks who will be “regulated” out of business in Illinois.. .
Pat Toomey is right. They’re going to get “universal” background checks eventually. That’s why we need to push universal background checks ourselves — so we can get our version of them and Dan Gross & co. don’t get theirs.
So you would take political capital and use it against our own interests.
Somebody elect this man to Congress, he’ll fit right in
Zing, pow, blam!
Yes, we can’t win so we might as well surrender. They may eventually pass a universal background check law, but they will never get universal background checks because that law will be unenforceable without universal registration. Should we go ahead and surrender on that front as well?
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Pat Toomey and all the usual suspects/Democrats want want UBCs as a proxy for universal registration. It’s meant to be onerous and discouraging to people like you and me.
Never mind that it’s unenforceable. Background checks will always be unenforceable down at the individual level, unless we also have mandatory yearly psych exams and monthly home visits (which the progs would love, but nobody has the resources for that level of tyranny).
Personally, I hate background checks. They’re an unconstitutional burden on an important civil right. Yet almost everyone (aside from our hardcore minority) seems to actually want background checks. The idea comforts them. And if enough people want something, eventually they’re going to get it, never mind how stupid it is. (18th Amendment, anyone?)
So what I’m saying is that if we have the technology to do UBCs in a way that would deliver maximum benefit (to the extent that it exists at all) with virtually none of the burden — and we do — we should do it. Our current system is stupid. The one Toomey wants is insanely idiotic. Let’s make our own, and make it NOT stupid.
Make it open to the public, not just to dealers and law enforcement. Fully electronic. It would neither track purchases nor purchasers. No info on what was purchased or even how many guns changed hands under any given check. Each party to a transaction would put his own personal info into the UBC app, and then it would show a simple yes/no.
Much better than what we have now. Universal in that everyone can use it. Unenforceable in that there’s no way to MAKE everyone use it even if the law says they should, but that’s true of any UBC involving portable private property, and it’s a feature, not a bug. And it could entirely replace the burdensome, de facto registration of the current FFL procedure.
If you could make this happen, why wouldn’t you?
Your idea of checks a gun shows would help but falls way too short. What is needed is the following because if there is no penalty for not vetting a second hand gun many people would simply meet out in the parking lot or down the road to buy a gun which would still let too many people who should not have guns that end up getting them.
Mandatory background checks on all gun sales under penalty of law. This would make people aware of the fact that if they had a private gun for sale and sold it without paperwork they would go to jail along with the criminal or nut case that bought the gun. President George Bush recommended this which is about the only thing he ever got right.
Mandatory ownership of a safe for storage of guns. It would cut way down on theft of guns which fall directly into the hands of criminals. It would also cut down on accidental child shootings. A child is killed on average every other day in the U.S. with guns left lying around loaded. 1,800 deaths in France as compared to 34,000 U.S. deaths. Almost 19 times higher.
Mandatory security alarm systems which again would cut way down on the theft of guns which again go right into the hands of nut cases and criminals.
Vetting of all guns would keep thousands of second hand guns from traveling from States with no laws to States with tough gun laws and many end up in the wrong hands. In any big city no matter how tough the laws these second hand guns can be bought within minutes by anyone and everyone.
Owning a gun carries a big responsibility and its about time America started acting responsible and move into the civilized 21st century. 33,000 gun deaths a year is ridiculous and totally unnecessary but when dealing with the far right the body count can never be too high even if it involves thousands of children. To the far right, they are only collateral damage and they are expendable until of course it ends up being your child.
As far as the paranoia about registration we have had registration with new guns since 1968 which the NRA said would result in total confiscation within a year, that was almost 50 years ago.
None of the above laws have anything to do with outlawing guns, only vetting them so they do not end up in the wrong hands.
As a matter of fact the Far Right is always their own worst enemy because they cannot see past the nose on their face. Its far more likely that tougher bans and confiscation will result if nothing is done about vetting all gun sales than if we do vet all gun sales. It stands to reason the more crime and sensational mass shootings by nut cases will result in the fact that its far more likely to result in total bans when anyone can buy a gun anywhere with no paperwork which is certainly the current situation everywhere in the U.S. today. You can often buy a gun faster than you can buy a hamburger out on the street.
So many places where you missed my point entirely…where to start?
First of all, I actually am part of the “far right” you speak of. I find the very idea of everything you propose abhorrent — mandatory ownership of safes, mandatory alarm systems, heck, even background checks themselves. The only reason I’m proposing any kind of universal background check scheme, even though I hate the idea itself, is to forestall all the crap you just suggested.
Everything you proposed will make life exponentially harder for law-abiding gun owners. Not only that, it would price everyone but the well-off and well-connected out of being able to exercise a Constitutionally enumerated civil right. And criminals will still do what they do, regardless. Worst of both worlds…no thanks.
Plus, registration leading to confiscation absolutely is a valid concern. Knowing where guns are and who has them is a prerequisite for taking them away. It’s been done before in times and places as different as 1930s Germany, 1990s Australia, 1970s England. And I can point you to all sorts of times when American politicians have outright said that they would love to march in and take people’s guns away if they could get away with it.
So guns haven’t been confiscated wholesale in America, which makes the NRA’s predictions wrong…but maybe it hasn’t been attempted yet because the NRA has so many members on the lookout (including me) and wields so much political clout.
Next, you’re missing the central fact that background checks will never prevent black-market selling or trading. How are you going to prevent any two random people from meeting in a back lot somewhere and doing whatever the heck they want?
If you want UBCs to do any good at all, you need to lower the barrier. You say it’s as easy to buy a gun as a burger? Either you’ve never bought a gun or you’re lying through your teeth. Make buying a gun with a background check even easier and less threatening than buying a hamburger. Then maybe you’ll get all the decent, responsible people on board, and none of them would inadvertently sell to anyone who can’t pass a background check.
“quote”————————————-Plus, registration leading to confiscation absolutely is a valid concern——————quote———————–
Here again your logic is completely flawed. Never mind the fact that we have had gun registration on new guns for almost 50 years already but lets suppose they did want to confiscate certain types of guns and they did pass such a law. These Morons that say they would be able to keep their unregistered guns are living in a fantasy world. The average Joe has a house, a family and a job and all would be lost if he kept any type of gun that was outlawed like say assault rifles. This has nothing to do with vetting as it would not matter whether or not it was on paper ,you would not legally be allowed to own it and sooner or later you would end up in jail for a long, long time.. Yes a few nut cases would keep them but the first time the Storm Troopers blew one of them away when they got caught with one or led them away in shackles the rest of the neighborhood would be tossing their outlawed models out into the street in piles to large to climb over. Your response really is not based on reality.
Actually as you yourself admitted this is way more likely to happen if we do nothing and continue to let anyone buy guns without vetting than if we do start vetting guns and taking the other steps I mentioned. You say people would not be able to afford safes and security alarm systems. Balderdash, in Germany and France that are much smaller countries and less rich they have been doing this for years and there are many people who own guns. I would say the amount of money the average American spends on computer games alone each year, elaborate expensive cell phones and other electronic gear would easily cover the cost of a safe and a security alarm system. No one said that the safes would have to cost huge amounts or what type of security alarms systems would be required. Every day the newer wireless security systems become cheaper and more readily available than the old wired systems of the past. Your going paranoid and throwing in the towel before they system is even in place.
And please do not question me when I tell you its easier to buy a gun than a burger. Where I am sitting right now, its closer and faster for me to buy an unregistered gun than it is to travel a bit farther and get a burger. Its just that the burger is a bit cheaper. And I could if I was a crook I could then rob a bank, go postal if I was a nut case or fill my care to the ceiling with second hand guns (not stolen ones) and run them right up to Chicago in just a few hours and get at least double what I paid for them, but I am too old to try and make money that way. I would rather do it legally.
Quote———————Next, you’re missing the central fact that background checks will never prevent black-market selling or trading. How are you going to prevent any two random people from meeting in a back lot somewhere and doing whatever the heck they want?————–Quote————–
And you mentioned two people meeting on the street to circumvent the law The facts are that when people have guns registered in their name they are not going to sell one without paper work because if it is used in a crime it comes right back on them. This is where the bulk of the problem is, people selling second hand guns that sooner or later end up in the hands of criminals. And this is compounded by also making it too easy to steal guns by not having them locked up in safes with security alarm systems. Tens of thousands of illegal sales would end very quickly with these new laws.
Again your grasping at straws and ignoring both reality and the history of other countries. Its true no law is fool proof but the average street punk and nut case does indeed have way less of a chance on getting guns when they are all vetted and when theft of guns is cut way down as other countries have done decades ago because of their gun laws.
Even the Brady Bill which only vets new gun sales has proved through ATF records that thousands of people were denied the sale of a new weapon but where the Brady Bill fell short was that it does not require vetting of second hand sales. Literally millions of gun sales would vetted only to legal people if second hand gun sales were vetted. Nothing is fool proof 100 per cent of the time but to do nothing is again the absolute height of pure stupidity.
Again to do nothing absolutely guarantees the mass shootings, street punk gang wars and robberies will eventually enrage the majority of people in the U.S. (that do not even own guns) to demand draconian bans on all firearms. Again its the Conservative that is always his own worst enemy as he guarantees that what he does not what to happen will happen because he does not have the foresight to do anything about the problem until its too late.
You’ve convinced me of one thing, Crisco Kid: There’s no possibility of productive compromise with ANYONE on your side of the fence.
I already knew that, but thought I’d try to get a reasonable discussion going about something that might have benefit for both sides. Should’ve known better.
Fabio seems to be a pretty squared away guy for a male model plus the dude has an insane motorcycle collection.
I’ve sold several guns at gun shows over the years. I even sold one to a guy who was leaving the show. I had no qualms about doing so, nor did I ask him for ID or a CCW permit or anything else.
Why? Because he was a clean cut middle-aged white guy. If he’d been some obvious Muslim with a scruffy beard, a dirty redneck with a neck tattoo, a thugged out black guy, or a cholo—nope.
Appearance matters.
It amuses me to no end when gun control propagandists try to pretend the gangbanger with the MS-13 facial tattoos is buying his guns from some rural middle-aged white guy at a gun show.
Rural, middle aged RACIST white guy.
No, I am not calling JC a racist. I don’t know him. I’m saying the media calls all of us OFWGs racist.
History has proven many times that clean cut white guys who were serial killers and got away with it for decades used second hand un-vetted weapons that were either purchased at gun shows or bought through private purchases. Its one of the major reasons most other Nations vet all gun sales. It does indeed cut down on criminals and crazies getting guns when they should not.
I’m going to have to ask you to show your work on that one. Please provide some of the “many” examples of “clean cut white guy” serial killers who murdered a bunch of people with legally-obtained secondhand guns who would have been unable to obtain a gun otherwise.
Only examples offered post-Brady Bill will be accepted. Remember, before 1994, even retail gun store sales were “unvetted” by your standard.
I could name dozens like btw, zodiac killer, hill side stranglers and it goes on and on infinitime, but you miss the entire point. It matters not if it is a serial killer or a one time killer or a robber. The point being made is you cannot tell a book by its cover and to make the statement that I was originally responding too was the other poster who said he had no reservations about selling a few guns at a gun show to a “clean white guy” rather than to a guy with a tattoo or a Muslim. Sorry but half the people I see at gun shows have tattoos and we have 6 million law abiding Muslims that are hard working Americans with responsible jobs. That was my original point.
Logic fail.
Even if that were true about clean-cut psycho murderers, you could stack up a whole century’s worth of them, and they’d still be dwarfed by the death toll from one year’s worth of gangbangers or terrorists using guns they obtained illegally with no background check.
If you want to show that background checks stop the crazy and violent from getting guns, this isn’t the evidence you’re looking for. Bonus points for the attempt at emotional manipulation, though.
You really had my head spinning on your post. In paragraph number one you agreed with me (without realizing it) by stating gang bangers would not get guns with back ground checks.
In paragraph no. 2 you reverse your self (Trumpism) and say “nope, background check would not work”.
My question is what side of the fence do you sit on from paragraph to paragraph?
On the more sane side of equation vetting all sales certainly would cut down on the wrong people getting guns, its just that currently they only vet new gun sales in most places (not all places) which results in a ton of weapons available to anyone, anywhere and in any place in the U.S. no matter what the current laws which are not consistent form State to State, the real crux of the problem. See my above posts about mandatory safes, and security alarms systems as well.
People with violent/criminal intent will NEVER subject themselves to a background check they know they won’t pass — which is why none of them do. They get their weapons by other (illegal) means, and background checks have nothing to do with it. That was my point.
In a way you are right they do not submit to background checks because they do not have to. They walk out on to the street and buy any gun they want because they are available by the thousands which came from people selling them second hand to anyone or they buy stolen guns because we have no laws demanding the use of safes and security alarm systems. Guns do indeed become scarce when they are vetted and theft is cut way down. Europe has proved their laws have worked for years.
I have been to Europe and believe me its not like the U.S. where you can simply walk out onto the street and start buying guns. Even to get an illegal one you have to become a terrorist and the terrorist is not free to do anything he wants with an illegal gun as well. Its not for self protection or robbing banks to get money for a drug habit, its to do what the organization tells you do and the bulk of people who join never get a gun unless they travel to the Middle East and get killed fighting in a war. In other words the idea that Europe’s gun laws fail as proof with terrorism is not true at all. The amount of people killed in Europe because of terrorism is actually minuscule compared to the gun deaths in the U.S. from all types of gun violence. You are actually far safer in Europe from homicide than in the U.S.
Some of the most heinous criminals were church going clean cut white guys which is a perfect example why all gun sales should be vetted. The one White killer that killed people at random and got away with it for decades by breaking into their homes was a leading member of his church, was white, clean cut and even worked in law enforcement. No, appearance does not matter as horrific history has proven way too many times as there are many other examples of the clean cut white guys that were serial killers.
I’m not sure who you’re talking about, but from the description, I think you may be referring to the “BTK” killer. If so, I’m not sure how background checks on guns would have stopped him from strangling and stabbing ten people.
Your right it was the btk killer and he used guns in his crimes but you missed my entire point. I was responding to the other poster who said he had no qualms about selling guns on his way out of gun show to “clean cut white guys”. My point was there have been numerous cases of clean cut white guys killing many people. You cannot tell a book by its cover. Too many times ones prejudices cloud ones judgment and the other poster was a perfect example of this. He made reference to the fact that he thought anyone who had a tattoo or he thought was a Muslim was a criminal. Strange since we have over 6 million Muslims in the U.S. and none of them in my neighborhood are mass murders. Instead they are doctors, nurses, dentists, businessmen, postmen, postwomen, etc. etc. And by the way a good 50 per cent of the younger people I see at gun shows all have tattoos and none of them have shot up the gun shows I have been at.
Background checks would have done nothing about this situation. As you yourself point out, this guy was an UNKNOWN murderer. Your ideas would impose onerous requirements on the overwhelmingly vast number of people who aren’t violent in any way while leaving the (relatively small) problem population untouched.
Actually in most of the cases he did not stab people at all he came at them with a gun and then killed them by strangulation. One night he wiped out an entire family by flashing a gun, tying them up and then killing them one by one.
I am not trying to dwell on this one case but simply trying to show that “clean cut white guys” do not always mean they are law abiding citizens when encountered at a gun show or when they buy a gun out on the street from another “well meaning clean cut white guy”. You can never predict what a book will be by its cover. I have seen some very rough looking, unwashed, unsavory characters that when down through the years when I got to know them found out they were law abiding citizens and on the other hand I have met some “clean cut white guys” that turned out to be crooks, swindlers and even one guy turned out to be a mass murder that went around shooting people at random out of his car window. This guy could have passes as a bank president. So the point is that going to a gun show with your gun and selling to a “clean cut white guy” just might result in him committing mass murder with such a gun. That happened not once but twice where I live and if it had not been from the fact that this nut case had a friend that suspected him as being the killer and turned him in to the police he might still be on the loose to this very day, looking like just another “clean cut looking white guy”.
While I feel for the employees losing their jobs, I’m pretty indifferent to Gander Mt closing. At least at my local Gander the gun prices are INSANE. Like selling roached police trade in Glock 22’s for $450 for just one example. Ammo prices are typically 25-50% more than Cabelas or Academy. I believe they actually list guns at MSRP at mine. I havent shopped there in years because of it, except for Bullseye powder, as it was the only place in town I could find it for a couple years. Bummed that I missed out on the discounts though, just bought a Hornady Lock n Load progressive press they had for a decent price a few days ago.
Don’t mess with Fabio. He once killed a goose with his face. While riding a roller coaster.
True story.
Seriously.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Maybe somebody should ask Fabio if he’s ever shown his face in a Gander Mtn. store. 🙂
QUOTE——————-— by way of private dealers — with no background checks, and without requiring either an ID or a gun license.’ ‘With approximately 5,000 gun shows taking place annually within the United States,’ it added, ‘the acquisition of firearms becomes a very easy matter.————————QUOTE
100 Per cent true. Criminals, psycho’s of the paramilitary lunatic fringe, and terrorists have no trouble getting all the weapons they need with no restrictions in States with lax gun laws which have no vetting of second hand gun sales.
France had 1,800 shooting deaths (with terrorism) last year and the U.S. had 33,000. Roughly over 18 times the deaths. Could we decrease unnecessary firearms deaths without banning guns? The answer is yes and its already been done in many countries.
1. All guns would have to be locked up in approved heavy duty safes and defense guns would have to have a trigger lock or small desk safe if children were living in the house.
3. All gun owners would have to install approved security alarm systems which would cut way down on stolen guns.
2. All sales of all guns would have to be vetted which would dry up overnight the tremendous flow of second hand guns from States with lax laws into States that have strict laws on second hand gun sales.
None of these laws would confiscate or outlaw the sale or any types of weapons already legal for sale and us. Only a Moron would be against such laws as history has proven these laws work in reducing gun homicides and accidental deaths, especially with children and also crime with illegal guns as well. Its all long overdue as our horrendous yearly gun deaths show clearly and for all to see.
Dead body counts do not lie but the NRA often does.
And remember it was George Busch who recommended the vetting of all gun sales. It was perhaps the only thing the Moron got right in his Presidency.
And do not forget Ronald Reagan who banned all new fully automatic weapons sales. Something the Far Right Fanatics never seem to mention or acknowledge.
You’re forgetting (intentionally, I think) that 2/3 of those gun deaths are suicides. Not murders. Not accidental shootings. Suicides. People who want to die. Should we also take away access to over-the-counter meds, knives, razor blades, cars, tall buildings, cliffs, toasters, and bathtubs? Also, how many of those gun deaths in France could be prevented if the French people were allowed to defend themselves? How many of those French people are angry because their government has turned them into sitting ducks?
I have kids. When my guns aren’t on my person, they’re locked in a safe. I would be angry if any of their friends’ parents were irresponsible enough to allow my kids to get their hands on a loaded gun. If they.were killed or injured, you can be damned sure I would sue and press criminal charges. That doesn’t mean it needs to be legislated. And no safe is completely childproof. Kids find things. Even those backup keys to the combination safe that you hid in the bottom of the sweater box in the top of your closet. The answer is education, not more nanny state laws.
so that’s where it is! i’ll be right back…
Your post is ludicrous in the extreme. I do not know ever where to begin. To say that we should do nothing because one super smart kid finds a key (which should be on the gun owners person or better yet have a safe you can only open with a combination) is just grasping at straws. You ignore that the majority of kids that would never be able to get into the safe and whose lives would be saved. To find a small exception to the rule and say let the majority of kids die is ridiculous.
And by the way the death of a child every other day in the U.S. does not result because of child suicide. We are talking of the accidental deaths of kids.
Stats show its not 2/3 but rather 6 out of 10.
Even if we consider your 2/3 figure out of the 33,000 deaths( as opposed to the 1800 deaths in France) were from suicide that leaves roughly 11,000 other gun deaths. That’s a hell of a lot of dead bodies to count and to do nothing is asinine.
And your comment about the French being sitting ducks. Not true, as the Stats prove that they, even with terrorism, are 18 times safer because of their gun laws as opposed to our lack of them. You are far more likely to be killed by a criminal or a nut case, or an untrained gun handler, than you are by terrorism the Stats prove it beyond any doubt and that is exactly why the French death toll is 18 times less than the U.S.
Many Europeans own guns contrary to popular U.S. Hillbilly belief. Its just that they are required in most countries to keep guns locked up, many are required to have security alarms and all gun sales are vetted and rigorous training is also required in most European States. No system is fool proof but the U.S. system is not working as well as theirs has worked, the Stats prove it. In the U.S. you can simply walk out onto the street, buy a gun with no vetting and or training no matter if you just got out of prison for murder, are a nut case or if you want one for protection but do not even know which end of the gun the bullets go in, a prescription for an accident waiting to happen. Brilliant, we could not have invented a worse system if we had deliberately tried to do so, 33,000 deaths prove it.
“Gun deaths” are a terribly misleading measure. Compare the murder rate regardless of method, and things even out. Murderers use the tools they have, and you’re just as dead regardless. Plus, every country is its own unique case wrt crime & violence. France and the US are apples and oranges (I prefer oranges).
For that matter, compare the rate of all violent crime — and then compare the victim’s chances of successfully stopping an attack using various methods. Guns are verifiably more successful at preventing victimization.
When considering the risks, let’s not forget the benefits. Widely accepted studies (by people who aren’t pro-gun by any means) put defensive gun uses in the US at a minimum of 80,000 per year. Those are lives saved, rapes prevented, and children who didn’t die because a gun was used in their defense.
Your trying to change the subject at hand. The subject being discussed never was banning guns in the U.S. but rather preventing needless deaths by some sane, common sense measures which have been used in other Countries with proven success. I think since you could not change history you changed the original subject.
the US has a much higher homicide rate than similarly “safe” countries.
Another difference between the US and other relatively safe developed nations is that the US has a much higher homicide rate than similarly “safe” countries. 14,827 people were murdered in the US last year. This is way down from the 24,526 US murders in 1993, yet still leaves the US at 4.8 murders per 100,000 citizens. In comparison, Japan has .4 murders per 100,000 residents. Germany has .8, Australia 1, France 1.1, and Britain–who has recently garnered media attention for being the most dangerous wealthy European nation– has 1.2.
you’re more than 10 times more likely to be the victim of a homicide in New Orleans than America as a whole.
The most dangerous US cities rank among the most deadly cities in the world. New Orleans, which topped the list in 2012, saw one homicide for every 2000 residents. To put this number in perspective, the average homicide per 100,000 citizen rate for the US is 4.8. Meaning you’re more than 10 times more likely to be the victim of a homicide in New Orleans than America as a whole.
Another notable trend is that no European or Asian cities are in the top 50 deadliest cities. This complicates the picture of the US standing toe-to-toe with the industrialized world as a low violent crime nation. At the very least, the deadliest cities in the US have many more homicides than the deadliest cities in Europe and Asia. At most, the US is a in a pandemic of homicides, even while other types of violent crime are stifled.
Wow. Just… wow.
You are drunk on your own propaganda. You acknowledge your own statistical inaccuracies with one breath and continue to spout them with the next. You obviously have no concept of actual gun laws in Europe. Hell, Scotland is trying to make it illegal to even own a pellet gun, and in Denmark a woman can’t use pepper spray to defend herself from a rapist. But yes, Europe is just a panacea of safety. SMH.
I am neither a right-wing Republican nor a hillbilly. But I am a gun owner. You missed my point on children finding the key to the safe completely. The point wasn’t that safes are useless. I don’t think any responsible gun owner would ever make that claim. The point is that educating children about guns (not to touch them, that they aren’t toys, what to do and not do if they find one laying around) is ultimate failsafe when other means of securing a weapon fail or are not properly implemented.
And requiring alarms? Really? What an utterly elitist concept, and one I am not shocked to see coming from a SJW. Not everyone can afford a home security system. For many people, a $300 pistol and/or a loud, barking dog are the best options they can afford. By your “logic”, no one who is too poor to foot the bill for an alarm system has any right to defend themselves? You, sir, make me sick.
He’s also ‘forgetting’ that the United States’ population is about 300 million more than France.
But tell ya what, let’s pretend all populations are equal. Your example of France, mine is Mexico- which gun laws far more strict that the United States. Let’s talk about the relative homicide rates.
Oh, I can just hear you now… “but Mexico isn’t like the United States! There are factors involved aside from gun laws that effect the violence there!”
…yeah, no kidding.
Yes I am looking at the difference in population between the U.S and France. Your chances of death by gunfire in France is 36,666 to 1 and in the U.S. 9727 to 1 that’s roughly 3.7 times more likely to die in the U.S. by gunfire. Again they are doing it right and we are doing it wrong when it comes to preventing gun deaths.
Again, gun deaths. Do other deaths not count?
This is the same flaming nut job that called me a racist.
Why? Cause I decided not to buy a vacation home in France after the .gov crackdown on civil rights following the Paris attacks.
He’s a complete idiot. You’re wasting your time talking to him.
So now we all know at least one person who reads (and believes) Jihad Weekly.
I the best that “CEO Marcus Lemonis” can come up RE Gander Mountain is this drivel, he is a flaming moron (and perfect fit for CNBC).
When Gander had a good price on a gun I wanted in its flyer the other day, I went down there to buy it. They were out of stock. Most of their good guns were priced hundreds of dollars more than their local competition. Ammo was priced through the roof. It’s too bad that Gander lost touch with its customers.. this is the end result.
QUOTE————————————-QUOTE————————QUOTE———————–
Cjstl says:
May 7, 2017 at 02:58
Wow. Just… wow.
You are drunk on your own propaganda. You acknowledge your own statistical inaccuracies with one breath and continue to spout them with the next. You obviously have no concept of actual gun laws in Europe. Hell, Scotland is trying to make it illegal to even own a pellet gun, and in Denmark a woman can’t use pepper spray to defend herself from a rapist. But yes, Europe is just a panacea of safety. SMH.
I am neither a right-wing Republican nor a hillbilly. But I am a gun owner. You missed my point on children finding the key to the safe completely. The point wasn’t that safes are useless. I don’t think any responsible gun owner would ever make that claim. The point is that educating children about guns (not to touch them, that they aren’t toys, what to do and not do if they find one laying around) is ultimate failsafe when other means of securing a weapon fail or are not properly implemented.
And requiring alarms? Really? What an utterly elitist concept, and one I am not shocked to see coming from a SJW. Not everyone can afford a home security system. For many people, a $300 pistol and/or a loud, barking dog are the best options they can afford. By your “logic”, no one who is too poor to foot the bill for an alarm system has any right to defend themselves? You, sir, make me sick.
QUOTE——————-QUOTE————————QUOTE————————
I have never been against educating children about guns but statistics prove in all their horror that kids are kids and they often do stupid things despite their training and teenagers are often out to impress their friends despite all the training in the world and far too many times stories of tragic accidental shootings come right from families that have owned guns for generations and left them lying around loaded. As I have said many times before children do not live in a vacuum, they also have friends that come over to play and those friends may have never even seen a gun let alone handled on which once again often results in extreme tragedy as it only takes a split second for some child to pick up a gun and accidentally shoot some one with.
With the current fashionable and totally ignorant trend that manufactures are pushing when it comes to striker fire guns with no manual safety the deaths have sky rocketed not just with children but with adults as well. One of the most tragic happened last summer when a woman was shopping with such a weapon and her 2 year old reached into her purse and grabbed a striker fired gun with no safety and shot her head off. The other incident came from of all people a loud mouthed pro-gun female that was driving her car , again with a safety less striker fired gun and her two year old in a car seat reached forward and grabbed the .45 cal gun and shot her in the back. She by the way was charged for child endangerment. As one can see its not only children that get themselves into trouble but many adults who through lack of mandatory training and lack of laws are often more reckless and irresponsible than their own children which shows how ridiculous it sometimes is when they use the argument, I am the adult and I will teach my children. I ask, teach them what, to be more irresponsible than you are? Now you know why profession mandatory training is often so much more a good idea coupled with laws that really throw the book at irresponsible adults that claim they would not obey the new laws. A few sensational prosecutions and the rest of the Jethro’s and Jessica’s get the message very quickly.
As far as cost, no law is a panacea but I see many families, even those of low income spend tremendous amounts of money on the latest updated cell phone or video games. The “I can’t afford it argument” is a favorite among White Conservatives that tend to be so cheap that every penny that passes through their hands screams for mercy. I will concede that yes there are some people with incomes so low that they could not afford a safe but considering how low a cost some safes are they are often lower in price than the cost of many of todays guns, so again often that argument is not as valid as people think all of the time. And in extreme cases of real destitution statistics prove that you are far more likely to have a child killed in the home with an unattended loaded gun than if you have no gun at all.
When you look at the overall amount of deaths you would prevent if such laws were on the books, i.e. safes, security alarm systems, mandatory training and vetting of all gun sales the amount of good far outweighs doing nothing at all to stop the wholesale carnage and death. In other words its a no brainer. Again we are not talking about banning any guns, just preventing the wholesale and totally unnecessary lose of life. Arguments against such measures using lame excuses, one in a million counter arguments, yelling I am too cheap to spend the money, or I will not be inconvenienced with mandatory training simply guarantees thousands of lives will be lost that could have and would have been saved. History in other civilized countries have proved it because of the much lower death rates with irresponsible use of firearms.
All this simply reinforces the old axiom “I never met an Adult in my life but I sure have met a lot of wrinkled, ignorant, irresponsible, children masquerading as adults.
So many words and so little sense. You are wrong in your assumption that guns (and not people) are a problem. Maybe even the problem. All your suggestions stem from this crooked view. Vetting transactions, mandatory safes and alarms, UBC, registration and all other “commonsense measures” garbage.
There is over 300 million guns in USA. There actually never have been more guns amongst Americans than today. 99.999 percent of them is never used for crime.
Out of 33,000 people shot to death you cite two thirds are suicides. No law can stop person who realy wants out of this world.
Out of about the 11,000 homicides, huge majority is committed by a very easily defined, small part of population living in inner cities usually controlled by progressives. Here is the kicker: Your beloved European paradise countries lack this part of population. They never imported them.
These murderers are usually felons, already forbidden by law to touch a gun. They don’t care about laws.
Let’s say you get your way and your ideas become laws. For the sake of argument let’s say they will work as you intended and significantly reduce number of firearms available on second hand market.
Tightening laws for law abiding gun owners and getting guns more scarce as you propose will have one effect. Growth of prices and automatically growth of black market. Today it’s not profitable for cartels to smuggle guns to US. Or make them in underground shops. Or break into Army or National Guard armories. Or kill cops to get their sidearms. But make legal guns unavailable and watch the prohibition effect explode in your face. War on drugs ring a bell?
Even if fairy godmother granted Bloomberg a wish and all firearms magically disappear tomorrow, savages will still kill each other with knives, spears, stones and machetes or bare fists and boots at higher rate than Europeans do. And if you dump millions of guns in Europe, they will not start shooting each other in drive-by’s.
I grew up in Europe. I traveled most of it. Never run in criminal circles. Yet even in country with tight registration laws and harsh punishments for possession of unregistered gun I have been offered full auto AK 74 and several pistols. Cheap. Weird thing is that I didn’t buy them and didn’t kill anyone. I did own guns legally and carried one every day for years there.
So, one more time – it’s not the tool, it’s the man holding it. Every bad guy with a gun did NOT start as a good guy with a gun. Most of bad guys with a gun started as bad guys without a gun. Bad guys will always be able to obtain guns. Just like they can get drugs, no matter how super ultra plus illegal they are.
And finally, if you like the enlightened Europe so much, dont let anyone detain you here. You will be happier there.
Quote——————–Out of 33,000 people shot to death you cite two thirds are suicides. No law can stop person who realy wants out of this world.————————-Quote
Even if we assume your NRA Statistics are true (which they are not) that still leaves 11,000 needles deaths a year. For Nut cases like yourself the body count can never be too high to inconvenience you to sign a 4473 form.
Quote——————-Out of about the 11,000 homicides, huge majority is committed by a very easily defined, small part of population living in inner cities usually controlled by progressives. Here is the kicker: Your beloved European paradise countries lack this part of population.——————Quote
With statement you prove you are an abject liar about living in Europe. They too have minorities that lack education and job training and their homicide rate and robbery rate is far higher than the rest of the population is. France has a very large problem of not assimilating refugees as well as the U.S. has done. Not they are not trying to correct this problem but the fact still remains they have not equaled the U.S. in alleviating this problem.
Quote—————–Tightening laws for law abiding gun owners and getting guns more scarce as you propose will have one effect. Growth of prices and automatically growth of black market.—————-Quote————–
Again pure nonsense as none of my proposed laws would make it more difficult to buy guns. It has absolutely nothing to do with limiting the purchase of buying guns or by preventing people from buying them that are not criminals. People have been registering news guns in the U.S. since the 1968 Federal Gun Control act and the Federal Act did absolutely nothing on preventing people from buying new guns nor did the later passed Brady Bill either. Nor did guns sky rocket in price because of these two acts either.
Quote——————–I grew up in Europe. I traveled most of it. Never run in criminal circles. Yet even in country with tight registration laws and harsh punishments for possession of unregistered gun I have been offered full auto AK 74 and several pistols. Cheap. Weird thing is that I didn’t buy them and didn’t kill anyone. I did own guns legally and carried one every day for years there. ——————–quote—————
More bullshit. Most European Countries do not recognize the right of self defense with a firearm. It is almost impossible to get a carry permit in Germany, France, Belgium and many other Western European Countries. Not that in the past some East Block countries did not issue permits but as of late they too have been changing their laws and making them much more stringent.
Quote—————–And finally, if you like the enlightened Europe so much, dont let anyone detain you here. You will be happier there.—————Quote
Actually we need laws to deport uneducated Hill Jacks like yourself as we would have a much safer society to live in and of course a civilized National Health Care Plan as well. Please get out as soon as possible so we can civilized the U.S.
Comments are closed.