http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-to-hunt-humans-with-high-capacity-magazines/ This lady has no business developing laws and policies that affect normal people. She needs to come out of her bubble every once and a while to see America and speak to real, live Americans before speaking.
Her constituents agree with her, seeing as how she gets reelected every time. She's just looking out for their interests. This, of course, means that entire part of the country is retarded.
The worst part is, is that she did exempt current and retired police from the same law. Got to get that police union support somewhere....
This describes more than half of the currently sitting members of Congress. On both sides of the aisle.
Clearly everyone with PTSD is a ticking timebomb waiting to go off on a rampage at the first chance they get. What a fucking cunt.
I think it was more the fact that she was basically saying any returning veteran can't be trusted because there is no way to know if they have PTSD. But retired cops are A-OK.
Yeah it's retarded on multiple levels. I'm just saying not everyone who has PTSD (cops, vets, rape victims, whoever) is prone to violence because of it, so even if someone does have PTSD I don't think that in and of itself should be something that disqualifies a person from owning a gun.
If what happened at Newtown had instead happened in a session of Congress it would have been a fucking blessing. Too harsh?
This kinda sorta relates: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...lmes-can-be-drugged-for-psychiatric-exam?lite
The real tragedy isn't that she's spouting nonsense, it's that more knowledge congressmen didn't immediately call her out on her bullshit and tell her to shut up. That is how the system is supposed to work.
I heard that some schools are now going to drop the letter L from the alphabet. Apparently its similarity to the shape of a gun has caused many educators to feel threatened.
My problem with politicians and this whole debate is that there is no middle ground, you have Fuckstein and the left wanting to ban everything and then some crazies on the far right saying there should be no restrictions whatsoever. A background check is not a huge invasion of privacy and a system where everyone who wants to own guns basically gets the same "training", testing and classroom hours as are required for a concealed carry permit along with a fingerprint card would be fine with me. While not being the end all solution to idiots with guns at least there would be a small amount of education and actual safe handling as well basic teaching of shoot or no shoot laws for everyone who purchases a gun.
The thing is there is a very large middle ground - made of gun owners - who do want reasonable restrictions. Not bans, not confiscation, not sin taxes meant to price guns above all but the super rich. And we are ignored, by both of the extremes who are getting all the air time (and ratings). The anti-gunners of course don't want to give up their straw man version of gun owners long enough to even recognize reasonable opposition, and the NRA has pretty much given up any pretense that they're anything other than a mouthpiece for the gun industry. I'm hoping that cooler heads prevail in the end. After all, the goal (and this bears repeating ad nauseum with the number of empty heads in the actual political realm) is to prevent crime, not punish the law abiding for being different.
You get ignored because who has any incentive to listen to you? If the gun control advocates listen to you, they get people yelling at them. If gun rights advocates listen to you, they get people yelling at you. On the other hand, the NRA/gun control groups don't lose members by moving further from center. Appealing to you is in neither of their institutional interest. Frankly, the only way to have a voice would be for every single thus described person to cease paying NRA dues. Your "advocacy" organization has ceased to advocate on your behalf, and yet gun owners as a group still funnel money to them and have failed to create alternatives.,
Universal background checks sound great, until you realize that they wouldn't stop the high-profile mass murderers like Lanza and Holmes (who normally have no prior criminal background and often have not had their mental illness diagnosed--if it was, it could be treated before it gets to the point of murdering a ton of random innocent people) nor would they stop the people committing the other 99.9999% of gun crimes (who steal their guns or get them on the black market). So all you're really doing is creating a ready-made database of gun owners. Fingerprints?? As in, anyone who wants to own a gun has to register with the government?? Yeah, fuck that.
Having spent the last 20 minutes looking at both pictures of the letter L as well as pictures of guns I feel I am qualified to support this decision.