Here it comes....

[Jamisjockey]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47338.html

Hopefully Boenher has the balls to tell this moonbat no.

[longeyes]

I don't think the American people are buying that any more.  That ship has sailed.  Too many have awakened.  Of course, that won't keep the usual suspects from trotting out the ancient agenda.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

I cam see it happening, easily.

Boehner: 

Ok. Support me on repealing, stripping down or defunding ObamaCare. And we will respond by finding a middle ground on sensible gun control, but only if it does not go after hunters and sportsmen.

Far Left, gun grabbing whackaloons: 

sure, we can do that. We will agree to revisit health care and revamp. And on the gun control. We will put a sunset provision, to make you feel better.



Probably not word for word, but damn close.

[Monkeyleg]

The Tea Party is about economics, but there's enough constitutionalists in the bunch that a sellout like that could result in the Republican Party's worst nightmare: the Tea Party movement becoming a third party.

I think Boehner is smarter than that.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

I hope your right.

[French G.]

Pennsylvania Rep. Robert Brady, a Democrat from Philadelphia, told CNN that he also plans to take legislative action. He will introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47338.html#ixzz1AehXg0vN

There's the real threat in that article.

[Ben]

One of the problems of course is, that after an incident like this, we see a runaway train of "We've got to do something!!!!" political responses. With politicians, if one side starts the train rolling, then the other side jumps on board as a self-defense measure, because they don't want the perception of callousness to be associated with them.

In reality, the only people who have to "do something" immediately are the operational first responders to the incident. Everyone else should be taking a step back and waiting until concrete information arrives, then give thoughtful consideration to potential political responses.

[Ben]

There's the real threat in that article.

Indeed. The slippery slope slide of "zero tolerance" from the classroom to the public at large.

[longeyes]

Well, the 1A, as we all know, was designed to protect the very political speech some appear to want to ban.  This, like a crackdown on the 2A, has been coming for a long, long time.  They will, sooner or later, probably sooner, force the issue.  Fine, it is what it is.  We need to force the response, which is to defend liberty at all costs, any way we can.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

There's the real threat in that article.

Don't forget the other alarming issue from the moonbat in NY. Stockpiling ammo. Who defines what a stockpile is?

[longeyes]

No good American needs more than ten rounds.  Didn't we learn that some years ago?  How many enemies you got, anyway?  :)

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

You know, I'm tired of taking the high road and using logic and facts when speaking to anti's. I'm not going to do that anymore. I'm going to call a spade by it's name. No violence, no threats, but instead of trying to logically present facts ( anti gun people just dont care) I will ask then why they like looking like idiots to reasonable people.

One can only have a logical debate if the other side is capable of seeing/understanding said logic. The anti's just dont care. They want guns banned. Logic and fact be damned.

[tyme]

I'm not opposed to that.  It's the same approach that militant atheists are taking toward religious believers.

Know your audience, though.  If it's some random blogger who isn't set on a hardline liberal hoplophobic position... someone who has written only one or two posts advocating gun control is more likely gun-control-curious rather than a gun control slut.  Starting out by accusing such a person of being ignorant of logic is a bad move that will make you look like a jerk.

The nuclear option is best reserved for hard targets that have had ample opportunity to consider the issue logically, and have ignored that opportunity in favor of hoplophobic whinging.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

Agreed. Was thinking along the same lines. Good post tyme

[Ben]

I refuse to login to NY Times, so can't link the story, but here's a quote from Brady Campaign that I saw on Calguns:

Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”

Bold mine. Interesting that they are arguing that a Glock is not suitable for personal protection.

[AZRedhawk44]

The spokesman for the Brady group just admitted that there IS a gun suited to use for personal protection?

 

[Tallpine]

Interesting that they are arguing that a Glock is not suitable for personal protection.

Only if you have a lot of people attacking you at once and you need to kill them all very quickly.

 

[Monkeyleg]

It's not good for personal protection because it refuses to shoot at bad guys. It only shoots good people, a design flaw that Glock has been working to correct for years. The gun should have been recalled long ago, but the NRA has been blocking efforts by the Consumer Product Safety Commission to do so.

The flaw was first noticed in 1991, when a police officer drew his pistol and aimed it at a gang member who was pointing his gun at the officer. The officer fired, but the gun jerked a foot to his right and emptied the clip into a garbage can. The officer sustained multiple gunshot wounds from the gun the gang member fired, which is designed to only shoot police. These "cop killer guns" are not sold at Walmart or other sporting goods chain stores, but can be had through unregulated sales at gun shows via the "gun show loophole".

The cop killer guns are assault weapons that fire a 50 mm bullet and can easily be hidden in a pocket. Because of their relatively low cost, they're the weapon of choice for terrorists trying to shoot down commercial airliners.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

And helicopters. You forgot to mention helicopters. Cause the gang member firearms have special bullets that home in on a helicopters rotors.

[Angel Eyes]

Don't forget the heat-seeking bullets:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRQqieimwLQ

 

[longeyes]

A Glock is good for protecting yourself against the pack behavior that collectivists have done so much to encourage over the past decades.

***

For many of us the "debate," in the sense of rational argument, is over.  The goal should not be co-existence but peaceful separation.  There's a nation within this nation--maybe thirty per cent--that will never be compatible with anything we believe. The sooner we acknowledge that and realize the fight we're in the sooner we will be able to save this Republic.

[erictank]

I refuse to login to NY Times, so can't link the story, but here's a quote from Brady Campaign that I saw on Calguns:

Bold mine. Interesting that they are arguing that a Glock is not suitable for personal protection.

Someone better tell that to all those police being forced to carry inadequate firearms!   

[red headed stranger]

I'm not opposed to that.  It's the same approach that militant atheists are taking toward religious believers.

Know your audience, though.  If it's some random blogger who isn't set on a hardline liberal hoplophobic position... someone who has written only one or two posts advocating gun control is more likely gun-control-curious rather than a gun control slut.  Starting out by accusing such a person of being ignorant of logic is a bad move that will make you look like a jerk.

The nuclear option is best reserved for hard targets that have had ample opportunity to consider the issue logically, and have ignored that opportunity in favor of hoplophobic whinging.

I agree with tyme on this as well.  I would like to add that even when I deal with really wacky hopolophobes, I generally try to keep is civil and "high road" and use as much fact an logic as possible. I do this not for the sake of the anti, but for the sake of fence sitters who may be watching in the sidelines. 

[T.O.M.]

It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”

And this has been my fear since Heller came through, with the "reasonable restrictions" language.  I've heard it from many of the lawyers floating around the courthouse.  The word is REVOLVER.  "If you want to keep a revolver in your house for protection..."  or "If you need to get a permit and carry a revolver..." or "You don't need some high capacity semi-auto like a SEAL Team/Delta Force member..."  I fear that this shooting is going to sprout a real attack on semi-autos, or at least the mags over ten-rounds.  I've even heard some fairly logical people, and fellow gun owners and enthusiasts saying that they don't need 15, 20, 25 round mags for hunting/recreation/protection. 

I can see the argument being made in Congress and in Courts..."We're not saying that all guns should be restricted.  We're saying that these automatics...these killing machines that can spew out 15/20/30 bullets without reloading...are the problem, and it's reasonable to ban these items because we are still allowing for individuals to own revolvers to protect themselves.  After all, if revolvers won the West, armed our nations police for hundreds of years, and fought in both World Wars, that's good enough for John Q. Public to keep his family safe from what goes bump in the night."

So, my friends, I may be shopping for a new revolver soon.  I fear the writing is on the walls...

[Ben]

Just a short blurb at the bottom of the linked story, but it looks like they're going for the ten round limit:

The revelation about the shooter's high-capacity magazines led one longtime Senate gun control advocate, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., to announce plans to re-establish a prohibition that lapsed in 2004 on magazines that feed more than 10 rounds at a time.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110111/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot