Gun grabbers to celebrate anniversary of Sandy Hook tragedy
Our favorite 2d Amendment journalist, Emily Miller of the Washington Times writes today that the dark forces of the gun grabbers are planning to mark the anniversary of the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School with another run at using the horrible events of that day to push more gun control legislation.
The White House and such groups as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Brady Campaign and Organizing for Action have been meeting for a weekly “Gun Violence Table” to coordinate strategy, according to a report in Politico.
The White House Office of Public Engagement, which is part of Valerie Jarrett’s fiefdom, is working with these gun-control advocates to plan events to commemorate the horrible shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, when 20 young children and six educators were killed
Never let a good tragedy go to waste. But, of course, the lesson of Sandy Hook doesn’t exist. Adam Lanza was prevented from buying a weapon by existing laws, so he killed his mother and took her guns. The gun control legislation that the gun grabbers want to enact will punish legitimate gun owners, not the Adam Lanzas of the world. Miller continues to address the real problem;
[J. Michael Bostwick, M.D., a Mayo Clinic psychiatrist] believes the current FBI background check system is not working to screen out mentally ill from gun purchases because many states are not putting mental health records into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
He said that three million people have been committed to mental health hospitals but only 200,000 of those people are reported in NICS. “As a result we cannot feel comfortable that we have a system in place to put away all the mentally ill people in hopes of preventing these crimes,” said the doctor.
Gun grabbers talk about “closing gun show loopholes” that don’t exist or have a negligible effect on crime (2% of criminals use weapons they acquired through private sales). They want to ban things and they don’t really want to fix the problem – keeping potential criminals from being able to purchase firearms and all of the scary-looking things they use to frighten the public.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
The Whitehouse Office of Public Engagement… the Politically Correct way of saying “Office of Re-education and Propaganda”
Using innocents murdered by a loon as political props. I wish I could say that shocks me. But coming from the Left – no, it doesn’t.
The hypocrisy, though, disgusts me. Because if the Left hadn’t de-institutionalized the mentally ill in the 1960s – and made it virtually impossible in Connecticut for anyone to be involuntarily committed before they committed a violent act – those innocents would be alive today.
If you want to see bloody hands responsible for Sandy Hook, Leftist “brethren” – look down at your own. You’re the ones responsible.
You made it impossible to take a madman off the street before he killed.
To their way of thinking, there ARE no legitimate gun owners, except the state and it’s min….ah…workers.
And in other news, America’s last lead smelting and processing facility is forced to close it’s doors due to increased regulations and preasure from the EPA.
Can anyone say ammunition price increase?
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/foghorn/obamas-new-epa-regulations-force-last-lead-smelter-usa-close/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/10/20/remaining-lead-smelter-usa-closing/
@4 Yup. I bought a box of Winchester .308 ammo that’s lead- free. It was slightly over twice as much as what I usually pay for .308.
Looney prepper that I am, I think I’m gonna start buying up the dusty boxes of window weights I always seem to see hiding in the corners at local yard sales and estate auctions.
Worse comes to worst I can always cast my own. Grrrr
If I actually owned guns, and in theory cast my own, I would start hitting all the sources I could to pull in stocks of wheelweight, linotype, etc. Theoretically. Them little .22 bullets sure look like a better deal now, and .45-70s a worse one, in terms of lead consumption. Hypothetically.
Remember, gun control isn’t about guns – it’s about control.
@2 never let the truth get in the way of a nice fat liberal lie…they don’t want to review statistical evidence any more than they want to have a national discussion.
What they want is to have a national directive, they are not interested in discussion and debate because they know their viewpoint is unsubstantiated by factual evidence therefore they continue to lecture and not debate anything. If you bring up any statistical evidence showing the negative impact of the mentally ill wandering around loose in every community, for the mentally ill and the non mentally ill alike, on the liberal east coast you are shouted down as a fascist who would wrongly imprison the mentally ill and condemn them to a tortuous existence…if you bring up statistical evidence of lower crime and violence rates in areas with less gun control legislation you are accused of being and NRA mouthpiece.
Liberals don’t want a debate, they want you to accept their edicts with nary a whimper…well liberal numbnuts that’s not going to happen, you hypocritical b4stards are about as useful as a cock-flavored lollipop…
We’re fighting a two-front war with people infected with Hoplophobia (fear of guns). (I don’t call them gun-grabbers, because the last thing they would do is grab a gun.)
We are dealing with the Hoplophobes in power. They have an agenda to take guns away from us to further their control and power. They know the stats and facts, but suppress them because we are their enemy, to be treated as such. We are the ones who thwart their reach for power.
We are also dealing with the average, Hoplophobe on the street. They are fearful and controlled by the first type by their emotions. If they have any idea of the stats and facts, they ignore them or believe them to be biased by gun-owners in our favor. They want to be safe, and are willing to give up their freedoms if they believe it will make them safer. You can’t talk to someone when they’re afraid — they won’t hear you.
The first group of Hoplophobes are using the second group of Hoplophobes for leverage to gain power. How we convince the second group of the first groups intentions is beyond my ken.
What you have here are your true believers and then the useful idiots. Those terms have been around for a very long time and are still valid.
Nothing has occurred during the past decade to change my belief that libs are simply enemies of the state – the very people from whom most of us here swore an oath to protect this country. They are the ones who enacted all the laws that morphed into a breeding program of more useful idiots. At our expense, in more ways than one.
They are all despicable excuses for human beings.
OWB: a minor quibble. IMO, Leftists are by no means categorically “enemies of the state”. Only anarchists are truly categorically “enemies of the state”. The vast majority of Leftists are not anarchists.
In contrast, most of the Left loves the idea of The State. It wants a powerful, central government in control of all aspects of your life – run by them, of course, since they “know what’s best”.
They are, however, enemies of individual liberty and freedom. And since the US Constitution was based on the principles of limited government, individual liberty, and freedom, they are indeed enemies of the Constitution.
After thinking about it for a sec, I have to agree with Hondo OWB.
A more accurate description would be ‘enemies of the States’, or ‘enemies of America’.
They are FANS of ‘the State’.
Semantics, lol.
So once again we see the Leftest Libtard Progressive Blood Dancers preparing an anniversary of victims, this time the victims of Sandy Hook. Victims that they themselves caused with their “Gun Free” zones.
I like this simple recipe. Libtard. Short rope. Tall tree. Some assembly required.
See, there you two go! Dating me, again. Mutter. Mumble. Back in the Dark Ages, we used “the State” interchangeably with “the Republic.” (It’s another one of those things that the socialists/progressives/liberals/statists/whatever we should call them this week changed both in meaning and in usage during my lifetime.) So, whip me with a wet noodle for regressing to childhood! I can still take it!!
Are they still called “State Dinners” when a foreign head of state dines formally at the WH? Probably not.
@14, interesting question. A far more relevant question would be, is any head of state interested in dining with Barrycade?