A very right on post from another source:

Tired of Hypocrisy
USA.


Where do they find these esteemed legislators who don't know the front end of a horse from the back end yet will write volumes of legislation concerning horse husbandry. It is however the voters fault that these know-nothing legislators are put into office in the first place.

Mr. Richard M. Aborn who stated “We don’t want to have to tell the mother of a young man who’s just been shot and killed that he was killed with the ninth bullet.”

Fuck Michael Moore. He's the best argument against evolution I've seen so far that's not named Kardashian.

I've never been an admirer of Moore. I am even less so now that he wants to use the pictures of the Newtown children to promote firearm legislation.

He has changed over the years. His films used to be poignant.

Boo-hoo. General Motors layed off his Daddy, sent him around the socialist bend for life. He's a moron, and a borderline traitor.

So why is the Department of Homeland Security buying up all the Hollow Point ammo? I read they're approaching 2 billion rounds ordered this year alone. Somethings going on over there, you don't use hollow points for target practice.

All i know is their purchases have created a severe shortage and the prices of ammo is going through the roof. Is that the intention of the administration?

well, remember obama telling sara brady a while ago that they have to do things "under the radar"? who knows, and say what you want, tinfoil hat, conspiracy theorist, whatever, the FACT is that homeland security has been arming to the teeth for a while now. in the beginning, it was to "protect" us from the terrorists that were everywhere all at once, but now the focus is on "domestic terrorists". very scary stuff indeed. billions of rounds of ammo, new multi-million dollar contracts with different firearms manufactures on a monthly basis, thousands of amroured vehicles, drones coming out the ass, NDAA, TSA, internal checkpoints, patriot act extension ect. all of this shit while the current administation has been pushing hard to eliminate a certain class of weapons for its own citizens.

And nobody is talking, they're not even answering questions asked by congress. I read all she's said is that they're getting better prices by buying all this ammo in bulk. Does anyone really believe that's the real reason for these mass purchases?

If this was the Bush administration the papers would be all over it but their boy Obama gets away with doing all this crap.

the best that can be hoped for is to expose whichever administration in power as the hypocrits that they are. by refusing to answer questions, things look even more suspicious. according to an article posted by forbes (credible by liberal standards), at the height of the iraq war, us troops were using less than 6 million rounds a month, so the 1.6 billion and growing stash is enough for a 20+ year war

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2...l-conversation/

i wouldn't worry too much though, after all obama loves you and he's a nobel peace prize winner to boot!

LOL!

The hell with his love, i want cheap ammo!

Megyn Kelly reports that the multi-millions rounds purchase is over 5 years.

This whole brouhaha was debunked last year I remember Palin bitching about it. If anybody actually read the language carefully they would see like Oli stated that it is over 5 years and the specific language states '' up to'' a certain amount.

DHS regularly fills all of its goods and services requirements at one time because it's cheaper for the agency, and that the 1.6 billion number was misleading because the language of DHS's purchase said it would need "up to" a certain amount.

One solicitation by the agency—for training centers and law enforcement personnel—was for "up to" 750 million rounds of training ammunition over the next five years.

Another five-year contract allows for the purchase of "up to" 450 million rounds of ammunition, he said, and was also for law enforcement. That contract would be used by all DHS agencies except the Coast Guard.


This is quite common to include language which gives you the right to buy up to a certain amount of a good or service on top of your regular purchase if you chose to do it even if its x number of yrs in the future. This usually locks in the bulk price discount or an inflation adjusted figure if its for the future. This is common in commercial real estate and the procurement of mass supplies, i see it in my office all the time.

I could care less either way, however Senator Dapper what in the fuck does the government need hollow point bullets for? The floor is yours Senator!

dapper, the technicalities are overshadowing a much bigger problem. what does the dhs need "up to" 1.6 billion rounds for? as has already been stated, hollowpoint rounds are never used for target practice, they are used to kill people. why would a domestic agency need anywhere close to the number of rounds they are ordering? why are they being shady and misleading when asked about the purpose? regardless of the whole gun debate, just as a cut and dry budget concern this should be looked at with extreme scrutiny!

Fuckin yuppies overspending on Wite-Out. That's why the economy is still in the shitter!

Thank you EastHarlemItal.

I have never worked for any DHS affiliated agency, but I know for a fact from my time on Capitol Hill that many agencies consider hollow points ammunition to be ''standard issue'' and use them for "mandatory quarterly firearms qualifications and other training sessions." I agree that a more specific useage explanation wouldnt hurt.

To reiterate as Dapper states above, "up to" or "not to exceed" is a common phrase that is included in contracts, purchase orders, or allocations and appropriations of funds and does secure an agreeable price for an extended period.

I heard about this article when listening to Dennis Prager. It's by Juan Williams, an African American who most would agree is liberal.


Some stats in the article:

* Murders with guns are the No. 1 cause of death for African-American men between the ages of 15 and 34.

* In 2009, for example, the Centers for Disease Control reported that 54% of all murders committed, overwhelmingly with guns, are murders of black people. Black people are about 13% of the population.

* The Justice Department reports that between 1980 and 2008, "blacks were six times more likely than whites to be homicide victims and seven times more likely than whites to commit homicide."

* The 44,038 black children killed by guns since 1979 (when national data on the age of gun violence victims was first collected) is "nearly 13 times more" than all the black people killed by lynching in the 86-year period of 1882 to 1968.


Williams goes onto say that the big reason for these facts is the breakdown of the family in the black community.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323869604578366882484600710.html

Same message said for the last twenty years or more...and they still don't know how to stop/change it.

One group keeps saying we are all the same and we have to treat everyone and everything the same.... and the next one keeps pointing out how we are not.....and we have to make special rules for some.......oh and by the way it is always someone elses fault for these problems.

Is the modern NRA based on the Black Panther movement?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...in-america.html

Found this on 9gag

CT turn to shake up its people. Make the good suffer for the nuts.

FS can you enumerate with specificity what changes you oppose, and what changes (if any) you favor?

Please address the following:

Mandatory background checks for ALL gun transactions with a ban on convicted felons and crazy people from getting guns.

Limitations on magazines.

Banning certain types of "assault" weapons. On this one even a bleeding heart liberal like myself has a problem with the myriad "definitions" floating around out there. I mean no one wants people to have nuclear weapons, tanks, rocket launchers, etc. Where do you draw the line ?

the backround check provision sounds good on the surface, but it comes down to enforcement. how do you enforce backround checks between private sellers, without knowing who has what first? this is the part lost on many. this is why people claim, and rightfully so imo, that the provision is almost worthless without a database of who has what, and when it was acquired, otherwise known as gun registration. the vast majority of people would follow the provision, so they aren't the ones that you would have to worry about anyway.

as far as the line with regards to weapons, the common theme(verified by the supreme court) is small arms that are in common use at the time, which includes the evil black rifles that so many are wishing would disappear, despite a lack of understanding about the function. as far as magazine capacity, look at it however you want, but the 30 round magazines are "standard" for the AR platform, not "high capacity".

i'm no expert, but i have a fair bit of experience with all sorts of guns. magazine capacity restrictions would have little effects on mass shootings, but they can sure place a defensive shooter at a marked disadvantage. the simple fact is that unless we are talking about single shot weapons, all of these recent events have taken place in gun free zones, where the shooters are basically free to reload as many times as they please. these events are also all planned out, and defensive shootings are usually spur of the moment where adrenaline is flowing, and people miss, alot. same with cops in those very same situations.

the other problem that i run into with people arguing for reduced capaciy mags is the claim that having to reload will give someone a chance to act. forget the fact that a magazine can be changed in a matter of seconds, even by someone unskilled. i always wonder why its generally the same people arguing to give people a chance that are generally against guns in the schools, whether they be armed teachers, or security guards. just some food for thought.

i also thought i would add some of the many advantages of the evil black rifles as far as self defense in concerned. whether or not you agree with me, take into consideration what i have to say, and you might learn something that you were unaware of.

these rifles are often labeled "unnecessary", who needs something like that for self defense? like i stated above, defensive shooting situations are a nightmare of adrenaline and confusion, even for the highly trained. people miss alot, so the extra capacity helps to ensure that you are able to get a hit, and hopefully end the situation.

the weapons are also very light, and low recoil which can be a plus for a women, or a man for that matter, who is of smaller stature and might have serious trouble with the considerable recoil of a 12 gauge shotgun or high caliber handgun.

another plus with regards to the AR platform is the ammo it uses. the lightweight, high-velocity 5.56/.223 round it fires is generally alot safer for a home defense situation. the reason is, because of the construction of the bullet, its much more likely to fragment in drywall, greatly reducing the chances of a serious injury or death of somebody who might be in an adjacent room. the sme cannot be said for the heavy, slow moving rounds fired by alot of common handguns, or buckshot from a shotgun.

I thought you going to Washington this wing no??

Well eventually all the private guns not subject to background checks will disappear by attrition. This won't happen overnight, but it is a step in the right direction. Bottom line is if someone uses an illegally obtained weapon in the commission of a crime he/she will sing like a canary when caught if there is even a hint of a reduced sentence.

I think the whole "assault weapon" issue, unfortunately, is too fuzzy to be enacted, but the background check is not.

As for the clips, I claim ignorance, however no one needs a clip of 30 rounds, let alone several of them.
Maybe there should be some kind of restriction on bullets.

Well said FF

[i]

As every state has it's own rules, I will tend to Talk about NY State because some jerk will pop up and say that it isn't that way around here....

1)[i]Mandatory background checks for ALL gun transactions with a ban on convicted felons and crazy people from getting guns.

For New people who are just getting their permits Sure. NY is very well above this already. They call in on every gun purchase that you make here. I think your statement is a given if you are a convicted felons or crazy person. But I shouldn't have to jump back thru hoops or see a DR. very time I want to add a gun. I should be good to go after I have been thru the process already.

2)Limitations on magazines.


Tuff call because this can be twisted in so many ways. A gun comes with a magazine with witch it is design to work with, rifle, pistol doesn't matter. It is a normal feature so that should be allowed as designed.

Fear mongers will cry about any size magazines because and you don't need this or that bullshit because some jerk has to show off some misfitted over kill magazine to look cool.

I will take the same rights as any other law enforcement officer. If he wants to protect himself or/and his family, I want the same rights.

3) Banning certain types of "assault" weapons. On this one even a bleeding heart liberal like myself has a problem with the myriad "definitions" floating around out there. I mean no one wants people to have nuclear weapons, tanks, rocket launchers, etc. Where do you draw the line ?

This is the biggest bull shit in all the text they produce. They have proven that they do not know what a REAL assault weapon IS and their use of the term LIKE is so wrong that in many cases they use it to ban almost every Rifle passed on looks alone and then they try and word it tight that they pick it apart and tighten down every point and it rules out all guns almost.

There are very few REAL ASSAULT weapons out in the public and that is the fact. Cut the crap with looks...Fact is these are GUNS and they are made to kill! Stop trying to pick them apart with terms to pan them because they look just like something.
People who start with this "nuclear weapons, tanks, rocket launchers, etc."
are just blow-hards as far as I am concern- They don't want to be real about these things, they just want to stretch things out of shape, so I just don't even answer a person who starts this crap.
The answer is: the right people should have the "rights" which he is able to handle.

Isn't it funny that the Govt will give an F-14 fighter or a nuclear turn key to a young man who may only be say 21 or so.

The sad thing is you will always get the jerk that will try to pick at every word you say or type and not get what is really being say....