Here it comes....

[longeyes]

Congress is already in a bubble.  Can it get any thicker?  The thicker the insulation the greater the outside anger will be that they fear so.  Shame they don't/won't get that.

Obama's talking tomorrow down in Tucson.  If he blames the shooting on "the Right" I think all bets are off.  But then everyone knew this year and the next would be "interesting" in the extreme.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Ok. I stand corrected again. In 95 and 96 they tried to repeal. Hmm. 97, 98, 99, 01, 02, 03- any attempts at repeal. You seem to know the facts, more than I.  Was their any pro gun legislation passes between 94 and 08?  Nothing comes to mind.
  

The Repubs never had enough control of the Senate to override the Dems on the AWB, so all action on that front was stopped.

There was a manufacturer lawsuit protection bill somewhere in there, but my memory is foggy on that point.  

Overall, it was a stalemate between the Reps and Dems on gun control, and most everything else.  A lot of us were really freaked out about the 2008 election results, because the Dems gained the numbers to break the stalemate and they could have passed anything they wanted.  We couldn't have stopped them.  As it turns out, their attention was focussed on other (arguably more dangerous) policies, not gun control, and with the 2010 elections we're now back to stalemate.

And thanks for the correction. I prefer to have good facts, I was slipping one this one. Maybe you can give us a little history on Peter King, the current republican calling for gun legislation.

I'm not familiar with Peter King.  He seems to be a lackey of Mayor Bloomberg.  He's not from my neighborhood, not the way Burton is, and his brand of Republicanism is foreign to me and my Hoosier ways.

Time will tell whether his proposal is anything more than hot air.   I suspect it's not, but we'll see.  If it does amount to something real, there are a good many of us ready to stand up and chop him down to size.

[TommyGunn]

...... Dan Burton Wants a Plexiglas Bubble surrounding congress:  ......

I prefer something more escape-proof ..... 

[tyme]

Time dilation field.  It didn't quite stop the replicators in Stargate, but while Legiscritters are more dangerous, I don't think with 1 physicist* in Congress it is capable of dealing with something like that*, so their risk of escape is zero.

(* Bill Foster (D-IL) wasn't re-elected.  Neither was Vernon Ehlers.  Are there any other physicists in Congress other than Rush Holt?)

Interestingly, there's an article with quotes from Bill Foster about this tragic incident.

http://couriernews.suntimes.com/news/3247291-418/foster-constituents-events-giffords-public.html

[RoadKingLarry]

I'm pretty fed up with the all the BS "reasons" attributed to the nutbag that did this.
Every partisan hack rectum with an axe to grind finds a way to blame the other side.
"It is an attack on our way of life."
"It is an attack on our system of government."

What a load of crap.

It was an act of madness perpetrated by a mad man.

And, like any number of other such atrocities, we are starting to find out that there were many warning signs and some serious red flags raised that in hind sight could (should?) have prevented this.

In my mind the worst offender may be that idiot POS sheriff. He had mutliple contacts with the shooter and declined to persue charges. I wonder if it had anything to do with the boys mother working for the county supervisors.

We have to be more civil, civil my ass, the next time I have some pissant liberal tell me some talk radio host caused I'm gonna explain in intimate detail why they are a freaking moron and are not fit to roam free in civilized society.

I think the biggest danger that is likely to come out of this is to the freedom of speech.

[longeyes]

Instead of worrying about the madness perpetrated by one man in Tucson, we should be worrying about the madness perpetrated by many men (and women) in high places.  They are assassinating this Republic, nothing less.  This is the usual anecdotal distraction.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Instead of worrying about the madness perpetrated by one man in Tucson, we should be worrying about the madness perpetrated by many men (and women) in high places.  They are assassinating this Republic, nothing less.  This is the usual anecdotal distraction.

i do agree!   and thats remarkable in and of itself

[AJ Dual]

Part of the rhetoric is the fact a Congresswoman was attacked. Sort of the same link you feel if a co-worker, schoolmate, someone right on your street is attacked. That's only natural.

Imagine what it would look/sound like if the MSM was being systematically stalked/attacked. 

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

Boy they are shifting into overdrive.

Link. Caution. Take blood pressure meds

http://m.cnn.com/primary/_A5tDLq-ilZDtHMFjU

[makattak]

Boy they are shifting into overdrive.

Link. Caution. Take blood pressure meds

http://m.cnn.com/primary/_A5tDLq-ilZDtHMFjU

And this article should decrease the BP...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-12-poll-ariz-shooting_N.htm?csp=34news

And there is little sense that stricter gun control laws in Arizona might have averted the tragedy. Only one in five say they would have prevented the shooting; 72% say tighter controls wouldn't have prevented it.

It seems the American people are well-educated, finally.

[Ben]

Although now it looks like Palin will have to respond once again because of her use of the term "blood libel". I'll need to admit my ignorance in that I've never heard the term (that I remember) or knew of its roots.

[longeyes]

No one has the right to monopolize the language.  That's Orwellian, no matter how unctuous those who protest.  This is just one more symptom of exactly what is wrong today with American society.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Although now it looks like Palin will have to respond once again because of her use of the term "blood libel". I'll need to admit my ignorance in that I've never heard the term (that I remember) or knew of its roots.

I think "blood libel" sums it up nicely.  It's when one group falsely accuses another group of murder, then uses said accusations as a justification to kill or attack them.

I've heard of it being used mostly in the context of religious groups.  Early Christians were accused of stealing good little children and draining them for their blood, to be used during communion, thus justifying lions and whatnot.  During the medieval/Crusades period, it was used by Christians against Jews.  I imagine it's an element serious hardcore prejudices all throughout the ages.

A political blood libel definitely describes what's being directed at Palin right now.  Kudos to her for describing it that way, it's a very blunt, direct and succinct way to put it.

The media are going to howl over it, though.  They don't like it when someone pulls the curtain back and exposes their deceits for what they are.

[Monkeyleg]

And now we're going to see legislation banning "hate symbols" such as cross hairs.

And Palin is taking a ton of heat for her statement, a statement that lamented the out of control comments and hyperbole. IOW, more out of control comments are being used to attack her lamentation of the use of out of control comments.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

I hope Palin sticks to her guns, pun intended. Blood Libel is correct. Leftwing news can pound sand.

[sanglant]

Good idea!  Semi-autos can only chamber and fire one round at a time.

Feeding ten rounds at a time would cause one heck of a jam 

works just fine in my 10 barrel ak.




 

[sanglant]

Can we make it airtight, soundproofed and opaque?

don't forget airtight. we wouldn't want any germs getting in there.

redacted, bad sang. posting on oxy again. what's wrong with you.

[CNYCacher]

. . . and there it goes?

http://www.slate.com/id/2280971/pagenum/all/

Maybe it was a waste of time for me to spend most of Wednesday asking members of Congress what sort of odds gun-control- or mental-health-funding legislation had. Some members tactfully explained that discussion like this could wait for another day. Others reacted to the question as if they'd been asked whether there should be stiffer regulations on what kind of shoes dragons are allowed to wear.

[red headed stranger]

. . . and there it goes?

http://www.slate.com/id/2280971/pagenum/all/

They might be giving up this round.   

this is not the Congress that passed the PATRIOT Act or the post-Virginia Tech bill. It's the Tea Party Congress. That was never clearer than when dozens of freshmen and staunch conservatives who are popular in the movement lined up to sign the Giffords condolence book, then explained to reporters why the worst possible response to the tragedy would be some new bill—on guns, on mental health, on anything.

Some whining from Barney Frank when asked about the possibility of new legislation:

"The Republicans are in power and have generally opposed it," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat. I started to point out that some of Frank's fellow Democrats were arguing that Saturday's tragedy changed the legislative picture because it directly affected a member of the House. Frank politely interrupted me.

"I'm sorry, don't argue with me," he said. "Have you read what John Boehner said? Do you know who Republicans are? I'm telling you what they say, and you're going to give me a logical argument for it? There's always been a separate argument for how much you should be able to shoot without reloading. It doesn't interfere with your right to defend your home, or shoot a deer, or anything. But given the Republicans' religious view of this, I don't see how it's going to happen."

 

It is encouraging to see Frank throwing his hands up in disgust on this one.  Hopefully, this is a signal that the antis aren't going to try to fight too hard for legislation this time around.

[Monkeyleg]

That's right, don't argue with him. Don't you know who he is? And don't you know that he knows all, including everything about Republicans (including the fact that they eat babies)?

[Ben]

I'm telling you what they say, and you're going to give me a logical argument for it?

Ha ha, that cracks me up. Don't you dare use logic!

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Ya gotta love Barney Frank.  He almost single handedly destroyed the U.S. economy, and yet he still has the chutzpah to show his face in public.

[makattak]

Ha ha, that cracks me up. Don't you dare use logic!

In Barney's defense (and I HATE defending him), it's more likely he's saying, "You don't have to convince me of the logic of pushing  gun control now, I want it but I'm telling you it won't happen."

He's annoyed the guy is trying to convince him of something he already knows isn't happening.

[red headed stranger]

He's annoyed the guy is trying to convince him of something he already knows isn't happening.

That was my impression as well. 

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

Wow. Just how stupid is King?

“I‘m not saying that a person’s going to follow the law, but I’m saying it gives the police an extra weapon themselves to use,” he said. “They would have the right to take the weapon from the person.”

According to King, he’s also hoping police will be trained to detect suspicious “behavioral traits,” which will prevent non-threatening people from being targeted

.

Yep. That will work out good. Not.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/laura-ingraham-calls-out-gop-rep-over-his-strict-gun-law-proposal/