GUNS (Page 2): Too bad you didn't shoot back. Gun's are not that difficult to make. Banning them will be no more effective than banning drugs.

c.murray132

Richard94611 wrote:

Maybe if you had been a teacher and had to spend a few hours with your kids behind a locked door, lying on the ground, you would have a different perspective. I have been in that situation several times when some loonie was at my school.

Too bad you didn't shoot back. Gun's are not that difficult to make. Banning them will be no more effective than banning drugs.

Zombiefarmer23 Loc: Bull Hills

cephusbob wrote:

Maybe if you had been a teacher and had to spend a few hours with your kids behind a locked door, lying on the ground, you would have a different perspective. I have been in that situation several times when some loonie was at my school.

Richard if your school wasn't in a gun free zone maybe you wouldn't be spending so much time laying on the floor!

There are many common sense things one could say in support of our second amendment rights, however, what should always be said about gun grabbers is go ahead and lay on the floor, moron.

jarg

Richard94611 wrote:

Here is the text of a message I received from Dianne Feinstein in response to my urging that the gun laws be tightened ...

This is a good insight into the liberal "mind".

1. Identify a problem. In this case, school shootings.
2. Implement a solution. Make schools gun-free zones.
3. While lying on the floor peeing your pants trying to hide from the gunman in your school, note that the gun-free-zone policy is completely ineffective.
4. Expand the completely ineffective policy.

The REAL problem is we are paying these morons to teach our children.

wiley102

Thank God I don't live in California and do have my concealed carry permit.

Richard94611

Oakland is "gunfree" ?

cephusbob wrote:

Maybe if you had been a teacher and had to spend a few hours with your kids behind a locked door, lying on the ground, you would have a different perspective. I have been in that situation several times when some loonie was at my school.

Richard if your school wasn't in a gun free zone maybe you wouldn't be spending so much time laying on the floor!

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Dianne Feinstein caught in a lie

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Richard94611 wrote:

Oakland is "gunfree" ?

Yeah, right.

Quote:

url=http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2013/01/28/oaklands-... (show quote)

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Richard94611 wrote:

Maybe if you had been a teacher and had to spend a few hours with your kids behind a locked door, lying on the ground, you would have a different perspective. I have been in that situation several times when some loonie was at my school.

What a Man!

Doncha know you're supposed to arm yourself and your kids with erasers and scissors and throw those suckers at the "loonie".

Some schools are stowing a box of canned foods, like Campbell's soup, in the classrooms so the kids will have some real "weapons" to throw at the bad guy.

Question is, what would you do, Richard, if a loonie with a gun smashed into your classroom and started shooting your kids while you were shivering on the "ground"? You'd only have two options.

CDM Loc: Florida

Richard94611 wrote:

Here is the text of a message I received from Dianne Feinstein in response to my urging that the gun laws be tightened (not that guns be taken away) and that gun ownership be much more greatly controlled, so the crazies out there don't go wandering into schools and shooting up students and teachers. And don't tell me that these crazies are not a problem. I have spent a number of hours several times on the floor in my classroom, along with twenty or thirty students, because someone with a gun was on school grounds or in the school building with one or more guns.

Dear Richard:

Thank you for writing to express your support for legislation to prevent gun violence. I appreciate hearing from you on this important topic, and welcome the opportunity to provide you with an update on the work I have been doing in the Senate to promote gun safety legislation.

I share your outrage about the seemingly endless litany of massacres committed in the United States each year as a result of easy access to firearms by criminals, mentally ill individuals, and others who seek to cause harm. From the murder of 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 to the ongoing gang epidemic in our nation's cities, more must be done to stop these senseless acts of gun violence.

I have long supported measures to strengthen federal gun laws. I sponsored the Assault Weapons Ban that Congress passed into law in 1994. Unfortunately, the ban was allowed to expire in September 2004, despite my efforts to renew it in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, in which the shooter used a Bushmaster 223 assault rifle, I introduced the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013" (S. 150) to again reinstate the ban on assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. I offered the bill as an amendment (SA 711) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" (S. 649). Unfortunately, despite strong public support for the ban, the amendment was defeated by a vote of 40-60 on April 17, 2013.

I also supported an amendment (SA 715) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" introduced by Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), which would have expanded background checks for firearm sales. Currently, a buyer is not required to undergo a background check when purchasing a gun from a private individual, including at a gun show or over the Internet. This amendment was not agreed to by a vote of 54-46, as the threat of filibuster required it to receive 60 votes to be adopted.

You may be interested to know that, in the current Congress, I am the lead cosponsor of the "Gun Violence Intervention Act" (S.1977), which Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced on August 5, 2015. The bill would allow a family member or close associate of a dangerous individual to apply for an order prohibiting that individual from possessing a firearm. Under this legislation, if the dangerous individual has a firearm in his possession, the court would issue a warrant ordering the temporary seizure of all firearms owned by the individual. Additionally, the bill would require that, whenever law enforcement conducts a wellness check on an individual, officers check whether any firearms or ammunition are registered to the individual, if a state maintains such databases. The "Gun Violence Intervention Act" has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member.

I also support efforts to improve the submission of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System in order to make it more difficult for individuals prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law, such as felons and domestic abusers, to access guns.

Please know I greatly appreciate your support for strengthening our nation's gun laws, and will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider gun safety legislation in the future.

Again, thank you for writing. Your continued involvement in gun safety issues is critical to our success. Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Here is the text of a message I received from Dian... (show quote)

If one takes the time to read the legislation Ms. Feinstein refers to one will come to the same questions one always does on this issue...how does any of this law making prevent a determined person in a population of 320 million with 300 million weapons in private ownership, from acquiring the tools and committing the act?

Lets start with the Assault Weapons Ban.

The Assault Weapons Ban expired and then failed reenactment because it was expanded by overzealous Democrats to criminalize weapons that by no stretch of the imagination could be 'assault' weapons. At the same time it omitted obvious 'assault' weapons particularly high capacity hand guns. By many this act was seen as the camels nose of the killing blow to the 2nd amendment on the basis that once Leftists start, they never stop. Aggravating this was the fact that the ban actually banned nothing...All weapons on the lists, legally owned at the time of enactment of the legislation were 'grandfathered'...Upwards of 20 million weapons when all on the lists were considered.

A ridiculously pathetic attempt to prevent...nothing.

Everyone should read SA-715 (it's on the Library of Congress site), the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act... which Ms. Feinstein says would have expanded background checks for firearm sales (an ambiguous statement on it's face when considering the next sentence). Currently, a buyer is not required to undergo a background check when purchasing a gun from a private individual, including at a gun show or over the Internet. This is a patently misleading understatement of the impact of this legislation on personal rights and privacy of the vast majority of citizens. There is certainly nothing wrong with more control of 'unlicensed' firearms movement...But these morons always kill the fundamental concept with overreach...and then blame somebody else when it fails.

S.1977 The Gun Violence Intervention Act...there is nothing yet at the Library of Congress on this act. There is however significant discussion of it's implications. It will in essence allow anyone to report a suspected lunatic be they a family member or not...put them on a list similar to the sexual offender list so they can't purchase a firearm (legally) and allow government confiscation of that persons weapons if they own any. It is not difficult to imagine 40 or 50 million calls to the 'Hot Line' by pissed off wives, husbands, kids, neighbors...

All in all the logic of S.1977 is not a bad one, depending on ones view of individual rights and freedoms; after all it worked quite will in Nazi Germany and the USSR...

And in the end, when the vast majority of honest people are potentially criminalized, when the system is further burdened with freedom stunting laws in the name of betterment of the human condition through central control, will we see an end to gun violence? Will the endless litany of mass shootings end? Will that determined person be prevented from carrying out their evil act?

I, for one, wonder...

angery american Loc: Georgia

Richard94611 wrote:

Here is the text of a message I received from Dianne Feinstein in response to my urging that the gun laws be tightened (not that guns be taken away) and that gun ownership be much more greatly controlled, so the crazies out there don't go wandering into schools and shooting up students and teachers. And don't tell me that these crazies are not a problem. I have spent a number of hours several times on the floor in my classroom, along with twenty or thirty students, because someone with a gun was on school grounds or in the school building with one or more guns.

Dear Richard:

Thank you for writing to express your support for legislation to prevent gun violence. I appreciate hearing from you on this important topic, and welcome the opportunity to provide you with an update on the work I have been doing in the Senate to promote gun safety legislation.

I share your outrage about the seemingly endless litany of massacres committed in the United States each year as a result of easy access to firearms by criminals, mentally ill individuals, and others who seek to cause harm. From the murder of 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 to the ongoing gang epidemic in our nation's cities, more must be done to stop these senseless acts of gun violence.

I have long supported measures to strengthen federal gun laws. I sponsored the Assault Weapons Ban that Congress passed into law in 1994. Unfortunately, the ban was allowed to expire in September 2004, despite my efforts to renew it in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, in which the shooter used a Bushmaster 223 assault rifle, I introduced the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013" (S. 150) to again reinstate the ban on assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. I offered the bill as an amendment (SA 711) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" (S. 649). Unfortunately, despite strong public support for the ban, the amendment was defeated by a vote of 40-60 on April 17, 2013.

I also supported an amendment (SA 715) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" introduced by Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), which would have expanded background checks for firearm sales. Currently, a buyer is not required to undergo a background check when purchasing a gun from a private individual, including at a gun show or over the Internet. This amendment was not agreed to by a vote of 54-46, as the threat of filibuster required it to receive 60 votes to be adopted.

You may be interested to know that, in the current Congress, I am the lead cosponsor of the "Gun Violence Intervention Act" (S.1977), which Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced on August 5, 2015. The bill would allow a family member or close associate of a dangerous individual to apply for an order prohibiting that individual from possessing a firearm. Under this legislation, if the dangerous individual has a firearm in his possession, the court would issue a warrant ordering the temporary seizure of all firearms owned by the individual. Additionally, the bill would require that, whenever law enforcement conducts a wellness check on an individual, officers check whether any firearms or ammunition are registered to the individual, if a state maintains such databases. The "Gun Violence Intervention Act" has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member.

I also support efforts to improve the submission of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System in order to make it more difficult for individuals prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law, such as felons and domestic abusers, to access guns.

Please know I greatly appreciate your support for strengthening our nation's gun laws, and will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider gun safety legislation in the future.

Again, thank you for writing. Your continued involvement in gun safety issues is critical to our success. Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Here is the text of a message I received from Dian... (show quote)

Just another example of 2 fools talking to each other..... :thumbup:

angery american Loc: Georgia

Richard94611 wrote:

Maybe if you had been a teacher and had to spend a few hours with your kids behind a locked door, lying on the ground, you would have a different perspective. I have been in that situation several times when some loonie was at my school.

Well if your weren't such a pussy....you would have had a gun...and ma by then you wouldn't have to lie on the floor sucking your thumb an wetting your pants.... :XD: :XD:

angery american Loc: Georgia

Richard94611 wrote:

Oakland is "gunfree" ?

\

LOLOLOLOL.......ONLY for law abiding citizens...too bad the crooks don't obey the laws....My advice is...get a gun..or a comfortable rug to lie on next time... :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Richard94611

That was a question, idiot. A rhetorical one. Oakland is NOT gun-free. I have a gun. But I sure do not bring it to school when I teach. School is NOT the place for guns.

angery american wrote:

\

LOLOLOLOL.......ONLY for law abiding citizens...too bad the crooks don't obey the laws....My advice is...get a gun..or a comfortable rug to lie on next time... :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Loki Loc: Georgia

Richard94611 wrote:

Here is the text of a message I received from Dianne Feinstein in response to my urging that the gun laws be tightened (not that guns be taken away) and that gun ownership be much more greatly controlled, so the crazies out there don't go wandering into schools and shooting up students and teachers. And don't tell me that these crazies are not a problem. I have spent a number of hours several times on the floor in my classroom, along with twenty or thirty students, because someone with a gun was on school grounds or in the school building with one or more guns.

Dear Richard:

Thank you for writing to express your support for legislation to prevent gun violence. I appreciate hearing from you on this important topic, and welcome the opportunity to provide you with an update on the work I have been doing in the Senate to promote gun safety legislation.

I share your outrage about the seemingly endless litany of massacres committed in the United States each year as a result of easy access to firearms by criminals, mentally ill individuals, and others who seek to cause harm. From the murder of 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 to the ongoing gang epidemic in our nation's cities, more must be done to stop these senseless acts of gun violence.

I have long supported measures to strengthen federal gun laws. I sponsored the Assault Weapons Ban that Congress passed into law in 1994. Unfortunately, the ban was allowed to expire in September 2004, despite my efforts to renew it in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, in which the shooter used a Bushmaster 223 assault rifle, I introduced the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013" (S. 150) to again reinstate the ban on assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. I offered the bill as an amendment (SA 711) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" (S. 649). Unfortunately, despite strong public support for the ban, the amendment was defeated by a vote of 40-60 on April 17, 2013.

I also supported an amendment (SA 715) to the "Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013" introduced by Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), which would have expanded background checks for firearm sales. Currently, a buyer is not required to undergo a background check when purchasing a gun from a private individual, including at a gun show or over the Internet. This amendment was not agreed to by a vote of 54-46, as the threat of filibuster required it to receive 60 votes to be adopted.

You may be interested to know that, in the current Congress, I am the lead cosponsor of the "Gun Violence Intervention Act" (S.1977), which Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced on August 5, 2015. The bill would allow a family member or close associate of a dangerous individual to apply for an order prohibiting that individual from possessing a firearm. Under this legislation, if the dangerous individual has a firearm in his possession, the court would issue a warrant ordering the temporary seizure of all firearms owned by the individual. Additionally, the bill would require that, whenever law enforcement conducts a wellness check on an individual, officers check whether any firearms or ammunition are registered to the individual, if a state maintains such databases. The "Gun Violence Intervention Act" has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member.

I also support efforts to improve the submission of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System in order to make it more difficult for individuals prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law, such as felons and domestic abusers, to access guns.

Please know I greatly appreciate your support for strengthening our nation's gun laws, and will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider gun safety legislation in the future.

Again, thank you for writing. Your continued involvement in gun safety issues is critical to our success. Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Here is the text of a message I received from Dian... (show quote)

Every single one of these laws, if enacted and enforced, would absolutely prevent people who aren't going to commit a crime from obtaining a firearm.
Your "Gun Free Zones" are actually "Target Rich Environments." Do you think it a coincidence that all but one of the last 20 mass shooting occurred in one of your "gun free zones?" According to the BATFE, the majority of guns used in crimes are about 10 years old or more, and are obtained by theft or purchase on the street from other criminals. Do you ACTUALLY think any of these unenforceable ideas will do the slightest bit of good? Are you that naive? The school shooting in Colorado was done with stolen guns. So was the shooting in Connecticutt. What do you propose? Have the criminal undergo a background check before he steals a firearm? The best way to stop school shooting is to have someone there who will shoot back, Unless you think it is a complete accident that mass shooters nearly always plan their shootings in advance to happen in "gun free zones," where they can inflict maximum casualties with no one able to stop them?
When was the last time you heard of a shooting at a police station or a gun range? Or anywhere that the prospective victims were likely to be armed? I can think of one, when Gabby Giffords was shot. Even then, the shooter positioned himself in such a manner that the couple of people there who were armed were unable to get a clear shot.
It is difficult to defend against a well-planned ambush when you are armed and expecting it. When you are unarmed and caught by surprise, it is impossible.
The NRA that you so despise championed the current background check system. In 2013, that system caught more than 70,000 people who were questionable about firearms purchases. The BATFE, tasked with enforcement of firearms law, responded in their usual efficient manner: They prosecuted less than 100 of more than 70,000 cases, and obtained less than 30 convictions. What makes you think that more onerous background checks, on private purchases, which are intrusions on privacy and completely outside the purview of the Government, which will be enforced no better than the current system, will do any good? According to the FBI, privately purchased firearms that would be subjected to useless background checks such as you and Feinstein champion, account for a tiny fraction of one percent of the crimes committed with firearms, the exception being domestic violence incidents. My grandson, who is currently on active duty, could not receive a deer rifle from me without a background check. Since this firearm would not be involved in interstate commerce, the Federal Government has no authority to mandate such a background check.
In short, there is not a single gun control proposal currently being touted that would have any impact on crime. Every one of them is either counterproductive or unenforceable. The majority of murders in this country are perpetrated by Black and Hispanic gang bangers, and occur in a few cities. Concentrate on the criminals, instead of trying to criminalize the innocent.

Crusty Curmudgeon

Richard94611 wrote:

That was a question, idiot. A rhetorical one. Oakland is NOT gun-free. I have a gun. But I sure do not bring it to school when I teach. School is NOT the place for guns.

Seems that no one told the criminals that.

;-)