Town Square

Post a New Topic

Proof Positive: Obama Announces That He Wants Our Guns

Original post made by Rochester Slim, Birdland, on Jun 10, 2014

Here we have it folks. After a single student with the first name of Emilio was shot in today's scuffle outside of Portland, Obama is jumping up and down behind his bully pulpit saying he wants to take away our guns.

Is this president beyond using the weakest excuse imaginable as a pretense for dismantling the NRA and leaving us unable to defend ourselves from the monsters in our mist?

Obama announces that there have been something like 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook. Yawn. It seems like he's delivered this same sermon at LEAST 74 times.

Does he consider that maybe a lot, perhaps a great majority of the shootings were justified? Perhaps the overwhelming majority of these shootings were self defense? How many happened in Chicago? Our Dear Leader doesn't tell us.

He says these things don't happen in Europe and other civilized countries. But he doesn't mention that (1) most Europeans have guns left over from WWII and (2) that there aren't any cities like Oakland that real citizens have to fend with. Why then would there be school shootings in Europe?

We need a president with brains who will back off and give American citizens a real opportunity to police themselves. Americans and true patriots: Stand Your Ground!!!

Web Link

Comments (16)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 10, 2014 at 6:42 pm

Gracias...but...NOT!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sport
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 10, 2014 at 10:10 pm

Yeah, our "president" wants to leave us with single loading muskets. LOL He's a real genius.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Formerly Dan from BC
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 10, 2014 at 10:40 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

So 6-7 minorities shot a few weeks ago in a Chicago laundromat and you hear...crickets?

I despise the hypocrisy of our media and national politicians.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sport
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 11, 2014 at 6:42 am

Dan, I'm not quite sure that 6-7 people being shot at a laundry in Chicago has much relevance to 74 school shootings. (Were the victims slain? Were they kids? Or is your point something about race: Minorities?) You are aware that there are thousands of shootings every year in the United States, yes? Do you want the media to report on all of them? Wouldn't that give further support to Obama's claims?

But, hey, anything to divert attention from our unfolding national tragedy. Kids are being shot on playgrounds and campuses at an alarming rate, but guys like Dan will point out that the real problem is at a Chicago laundry, it involves minorities, and that the media isn't doing its job. Good one, Dan. Keep that brain of yours working!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2014 at 2:42 pm

jimf01 is a registered user.

The facts on the supposed everytown report showing 74 "shootings at schools" since the Newtown school shooting.

Web Link

Short version: lots of lies

1 was self defense
1 didn't actually happen
In less than 7 of these listed incident did more than one person get shot

What happens when these lies are perpetuated? You get an anti-gun rights President making statements like "We're the only developed country on Earth where this happens,"..."it happens now once a week. And it's a one-day story. There's no place else like this."

The president added later: "So the country has to do some soul-searching about this. This is becoming the norm."

These statements are simply untrue. But the public believes them.

According to a new Pew Research Center survey, today 56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower."

The truth?

National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s:

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation's population grew.

Let's have a fact-based discussion. Let's include the fact that overall crime has declined in eevery metropolitan area that has recently had changes in laws allowing MORE citizens to carry guns.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2014 at 2:47 pm

jimf01 is a registered user.

Statistics vs surveys of American beliefs of gun crime and gun homicides in the US
Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Neighbor
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2014 at 2:50 pm

Jimbo, the fact that there was even ONE incident on school grounds is too many for me. I do not need 74 incidents, or whatever number you want to agree on, to convince me that Americans have too many guns.

Do you actually believe your own post, or are you playing Devil's Advocate here? Your statement that "In less than 7 of these listed incident did more than one person get shot" appalls me to no end. What number of casualties is ok for you, Jimbo?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2014 at 3:13 pm

jimf01 is a registered user.

All I asked for is a fact based discussion. I never said it was OK for people to be murdered, so that is what is referred to as a red herring. It's the same as asking "When did you stop beating your wife?"


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Damon
a resident of Foothill Knolls
on Jun 11, 2014 at 3:48 pm

I think that the recent shootings in Las Vegas put a lie to the line of many gun proponents that more guns are the solution to the sort of random, senseless violence that took place in Las Vegas. Here we had two well-armed and professionally trained Las Vegas police officers who were quietly eating their lunch before being shot by two extremist nuts.

Did the fact that the police officers had guns on them deter the two extremists from shooting them? No. The two extremists simply surprised them and shot them and took their guns. Then these two extremists ran over to a Wal-Mart where they encountered a citizen armed with a gun (concealed carry, I believe). Now in the standard fairy tale promoted by the NRA and many gun proponents, that should have been the end of the crime spree: Citizen shoots bad guys like in the movies. NRA cheers and claims that they are vindicated and that more guns are the solution to society's problems. But, no, the armed citizen was himself surprised by the extremists, not realizing there there were two of them and not just one. Armed citizen shot and killed. Spree by bad guys continues.

To be sure, the SWAT team eventually shows up and the killers decide to end the spree by killing themselves. So, yes, the SWAT team and their guns help to end the spree. However, this tragedy does show that simply being armed with a gun is no effective defense against a surprise attack. We need to work in ensuring that mentally unbalanced people (as these two killers undoubtedly were) should not be able to possess guns.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Damon
a resident of Foothill Knolls
on Jun 11, 2014 at 3:58 pm

@jimf01 : "National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s: Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation's population grew. Let's have a fact-based discussion. "

So you're cheering the fact that gun homicide rates are lower than they were in the mid-90's? That's your criterion for arguing that gun homicide rates in the US are not a problem? Your logic escapes me. Why not use as a criterion something like, say, comparing the gun homicide rates in the US to those of other modern, democratic countries to gauge whether gun homicide rates are a problem or not?

@jimf01: "Let's include the fact that overall crime has declined in eevery metropolitan area that has recently had changes in laws allowing MORE citizens to carry guns."

If you're trying to credit increased possession of guns for lower crime rates (and from the sentence above it sounds that you are), then why not compare rates of gun ownership in various countries (including the US) to their rate of violent crime?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2014 at 4:41 pm

jimf01 is a registered user.

Damon - You are attempting to persist at removing the facts from the situation.

Armed citizen shot and killed. Spree by bad guys continues --FALSE

To continue the spree, they would have to be on the loose and free to commit more crimes. In fact, the shooting of the CCW holder who intervened was what allowed police to very soon thereafter catch up to them in the Wal-mart, and the bad guys lives ended. The CCW holder quite possibly saved many lives that day.
And the intervention of a CCW holders stopping bad guys is FAR from a "fairy tale promoted by the NRA", it is in fact how many bad guys with guns have been stopped: by good guys with guns.

"your criterion for arguing that gun homicide rates in the US are not a problem" -- FALSE
I never said this. I asked for a fact-based discussion, and yes, a drop in gun homicides is something we should all cheer.

If you want to argue we should have different laws, and the gun murder rates are lower in countries with prohibitions on gun ownership means those laws are better, you can make that argument. Just do it honestly, and you will get the honest answer from a large majority of Americans. We like our guns, and our freedom to have them.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Damon
a resident of Foothill Knolls
on Jun 11, 2014 at 5:16 pm

@jimf01 : "Damon - You are attempting to persist at removing the facts from the situation. Armed citizen shot and killed. Spree by bad guys continues --FALSE "

You're the one who is playing with facts, jimf01. I'm not denying that there are cases when an armed citizen may have made a difference, but in this particular case the armed citizen served as little more than a speed-bump to the two rampaging killers. Your claim that this CCW owner "quite possibly saved many lives that day" is silly. The CCW holder, Joseph Wilcox, was shot and killed by one of the killers before he had a chance to shoot either one of the killers.

I don't object to responsible citizen ownership of guns, but something has to be done about allowing the many crazies out there from owning a gun. The 2nd Amendment says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." OK, then, so the 2nd Amendment speaks of gun ownership in the contact of a "well regulated militia". Any responsible militia or army has certain screening standards. The US Army does not let anyone become a soldier. They screen applicants for mental fitness before entrusting that person to carry a gun. The same should be true of any American member of any "militia" in the context of the 2nd Amendment. People like the two Las Vegas killers would not pass any mental qualification tests to become members of any army or militia. You can be sure that if they showed up at a US Army recruiting office that the Army, after screening them, would never have put guns into their hands.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 11, 2014 at 9:02 pm

It's tragic that so many young folks are being murdered by guns in the hands of crazies...sometimes there is no mercy

tragic...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Formerly Dan from BC
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 12, 2014 at 7:31 am

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

If you don't get the point "sport", then I'm not wasting my time explaining it to you.

Troll


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Jun 12, 2014 at 9:13 am

jimf01 is a registered user.

So I am "playing with facts"? Which fact I gave is incorrect? In your attempt to discredit me, you quoted my opinion (clue, opinion is not a fact) and disagreed.

We can disagree all day long. No problem.

You can have the opinion "something has to be done about allowing the many crazies out there from owning a gun", but I would tell you that the fact is something is already done. Some people slip through the cracks.
Web Link

"A model for the nation" didn't help stop the young man in Santa Barbara, did it?

You can have the opinion that "People like the two Las Vegas killers would not pass any mental qualification tests to become members of any army", but I would say the facts show you are incorrect. Have you never seen news reports about soldiers with mental issues attacking their own comrades or even family members?
What we can probably agree on is that it is a difficult issue. Preserving our constitutional rights is critical, keeping deadly weapons out of the hands of mentally troubled individuals is very important as well.


So feel free to point out which "fact" I am "playing with". The police have hailed Mr Wilcox as a hero for his actions, but you degrade him as a speed bump. That really says a lot more about you than it does about Mr Wilcox.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Formerly Dan from BC
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 12, 2014 at 3:46 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

Damon,

I noticed how you connect the Militia with guns but you forgot this little sentence: "...the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms..."

Darn those founding fathers for allowing the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms!

I guess now we're going to have the discussion about the type of arms?

Sigh...




Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


To post your comment, please click here to Log in

Remember me?
Forgot Password?
or register. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

Not Endorsements
By Roz Rogoff | 9 comments | 1,226 views

A second half of life exceptionally well lived
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 643 views