Don Lemon Confuses Novice CNN Gun Nut With Use Of Term ‘Automatic Weapon’
Conservatives are gleefully rimfiring in their jeans over a clip of CNN’s Don Lemon arguing with conservative pundit and Guy Who Always Dresses As Baby New Year For Halloween Ben Ferguson over the meaning of “automatic weapon,” but a surprising source says the gun nuts are the idiots here. Breitbart.com‘s John Nolte decries Lemon’s “jaw-dropping ignorance”( a sentiment echoed by NRO’s Charles W. Cooke), while The Daily Caller warned readers that their critique of Lemon “is racist, because it mocks a black person for being wrong and refusing to admit it” because the blacks, they are so sensitive about racism, har-har.
Jim Treacher’s meta-racism aside, all of this derision is being heaped on Don Lemon over what TheBlaze.com calls “an embarrassing exchange” during a segment on the unrest in Ferguson, MO, in which Lemon brought up the subject of the Second Amendment.
“Most people, I think, are for the Second Amendment right,” Lemon said, adding “Most people are. I am for that. I think people should be able to protect themselves. But if you’re going to be honest about it, I don’t think our founding fathers had these automatic weapons and military-style weapons in mind when the Second Amendment was drafted.”
That’s where the trouble started, because Ferguson (the Ben, not the City of) jumped all over Lemon for his use of the term “automatic weapon,” but unfortunately for him, and all of his pasty gun-nut Lemon-haters, he gave up the game with his first pitch.
Here’s the segment, see if you can tell where Ferguson the Ben fucked up:
“Are you implying for the police, or are you implying for the private citizen? Because the majority of private citizens are not allowed to own fully automatic weapons.”
Oh, Ben, you messed up there, because if an automatic weapon just is an automatic weapon (sure as Santa Claus just is white), then why did you have to say “fully automatic,” instead of just automatic? That’s just math. Or words. Or something.
Well, maybe Ferguson the Ben was just being extra-“precise” for all of those Lemon-like dummies out there who don’t know the difference between “fully automatic” and “semi-automatic,” because no one who knows anything about guns would refer to a semi-automatic weapon as an “automatic,” certainly not…READ MORE
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tommy Christopher
Tommy Christopher is The Daily Banter's White House Correspondent and Political Analyst. He's been a political reporter and liberal commentator since 2007, and has covered the White House since the beginning of the Obama administration, first for PoliticsDaily, and then for Mediaite. Christopher is a frequent guest on a variety of television, radio, and online programs, and was the villain in the documentaries The Audacity of Democracy and Hating Breitbart. He's also That Guy Who Live-Tweeted His Own Heart Attack, and the only person to have ever received public apologies from both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
158 responses to Don Lemon Confuses Novice CNN Gun Nut With Use Of Term ‘Automatic Weapon’
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
granpa.usthai August 21st, 2014 at 15:55
If, with all the NRA supported restrictions a private citizen qualifies for a semi-automatic, they can legally own a fully automatic weapon by paying the federal tax. Don’t understand the ‘legal’ restriction comments being a big deal? If you’re in a unregulated militia you can go any damn where you want to and do whatever you want to as long as you have matching or greater firepower (ref: Nevada to these conservatives that seem to be so wrought on legalities now).
What the unregulated militias have learned – and a growing number of citizens whose human rights are supported by nations that support those rights instead of using the words to condemn other nations are learning is that with overwhelming firepower you don’t really have to be all that concerned about legal or illegal including restraining over reaching Law Enforcement Officials who are equal or inferior in firepower. What works well in the streets of the USA for ARMED unregulated WHITE militias should work in the same manner with the same outcome for ARMED unregulated BLACK militias, otherwise foreign nations have the right to sanction the United States Government and support the efforts of ARMING USA unregulated FREEDOM FIGHTERS.
Dwendt44 August 21st, 2014 at 16:07
the ‘militarization of many police and sheriff’s depts gives them access to ‘fully automatic’ M-16/M-4 rifles and even machine guns mounted on APCs. Converting an M-15 to full auto takes three or four real small parts, and a good gunsmith doesn’t even need those. So the self-styled militia nuts can and some times do get the crazy idea that they too need these war weapons to fight off the hoards of rampaging minorities that might rise up any day now.
olford August 21st, 2014 at 19:51
Most conservative fire arm owners operate within the law. And are well safety mined people and will not fire unless the enemy fires first.
Self defend each other and as well as neighbors.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:18
An AR-15 would require some delicate machine work AND parts that are illegal to buy without proper licensing.
Dwendt44 August 22nd, 2014 at 12:22
Ya right. Any competent gunsmith can make the detent spring, and the minor machining of the two parts are easily done with a steady hand. It’s not as difficult as you think, or should I say, as you’d like us to believe.
A_Bone_2_Pick August 22nd, 2014 at 15:31
Retreating the sear is not an easy process if you want reliability – and it’s very, very illegal. If you knew anything about what you are speaking you would know 1) it’s not easy, 2) most people don’t have a clue as to how to do it, 3) you can’t just drop in the replacement parts for a M16 into a AR15, 4) it’s the kind of illegal that they will put you away for at least 10 years and that’s only if you have a very good and well paid lawyer.
Dwendt44 August 22nd, 2014 at 16:04
Me thinks you protest too much. It is not easy for the average Joe to do, I didn’t say it was. A proficient gunsmith is another matter. True, now a days, few know how. BUT it wasn’t that long ago you could learn how and maybe get the needed parts over the internet. Not today, as big brother is watching, but there are sources if you know where to look.
The trigger/hammer assembly from an M16 will, or it used to, drop right in to an AR15.
Sure it’s illegal. what’s that got to do with certain gun nuts that have a larger arsenal than many police departments that want the latest, best, biggest, hottest, and scariest weapons in his group.
Those so-called ‘patriots’ didn’t care that it was illegal to aim their AR-15s at federal agents in Nevada.
Those that stock pile many thousands of dollars in food, supplies, and ammo in the foolish anticipation of a never happen apocalypses aren’t all that concerned about silly laws. Some of them wish they could get bazookas and RPGs, assuming they don’t have some already.
A_Bone_2_Pick August 22nd, 2014 at 16:39
Um, well, the phrase “used to” means you are out of touch. As for a profecient gun smtih, well sure. But, it’s still illegal and if you as a gun smith get caught you are not going to get the 10 years I mentioned earlier.
As for “learning how” well, sure you can. But then you need the appropriate equipment and setup to apply that work. But, you are talking as though having a fully automatic weapon is some kind of magic talisman for death and destruction. Again, if you knew what you were talking about you would realize that full auto is primarily something used for enemy supression. Going full auto wastes a lot of ammo and is not a precise business. But, wait, since you want to go down this slippery slope that is not an issue because 1) the vast majority of people are not buying or seeking out fully automatic weapons, and 2) you can build your own lethal weapons after visiting the appropriate isles at the drug store and home depot.
You make this assertion “Sure it’s illegal. what’s that got to do with certain gun nuts that have a larger arsenal than many police departments that want the latest, best, biggest, hottest, and scariest weapons in his group.” So what? They aren’t illegal weapons unless they are criminals – get it? It would be worse if the “gun nuts” you are referring to were in fact criminals. But, that’s not the truth of the matter for the vast majority of them. Most are law-abiding people.
In fact, after reading this latest rant of yours I am convinced you need a little more gun-control training as your arguments are full of holes.
What in the world does the conflict in Nevada have to do with all of this topic? Are you saying that people shouldn’t be allowed to defend themselves? In that case those people were “peacefully” able to convince the “government” they weren’t going to allow the abuse they perceived to go on any longer. Maybe they were right, maybe they weren’t. But, the “government” decided th3y had better avoid pushing an already fed up population any farther by agitating the situation by confiscating more of that rancher’s cattle. In the end, the government was the bully and the people stood up to it. The government was effectively stealing from that rancher. The store owners in Ferguson told the looters there the same thing – no more.
AS for the rest of your nonsense – the RPGs etcetera, storing food for calamities was the norm for a long time for a lot of people. I am not sure how you think you’ve formed a well thought out argument by condemning those who would be worried about the condition of the world today given the current events? You’ve basically told me, and everyone reading, that you are against planning ahead and you think anyone who does is a nut job.
I am sure you are quite fun at parties and during family time on holidays.
A_Bone_2_Pick September 11th, 2014 at 17:14
Hmm, you think a protest in Nevada isn’t ok but what about Ferguson?
Since we are mixing arguments and veering away from the point?
Sure lots of illegal things can be done. But, as soon as you start claiming someone who stock piles food for a emergency or calamity is a nutjob you just invalidated your entire argument. According to you, every animal that collects and stores food is a nutjob.
AS for your “certain nuts” those are few and far in between… You are as much of an alarmist as any other of the typical alarmist. Under the right circumstances you will be begging those “certain nuts” for help and protection.
Dawg August 29th, 2014 at 07:50
“Any competent gunsmith”……I’ve known several in my life and what they do is in no way easy. You’re downplaying the difficulty to try and prove your point.
granpa.usthai August 21st, 2014 at 15:55
If, with all the NRA supported restrictions a private citizen qualifies for a semi-automatic, they can legally own a fully automatic weapon by paying the federal tax. Don’t understand the ‘legal’ restriction comments being a big deal? If you’re in a unregulated militia you can go any damn where you want to and do whatever you want to as long as you have matching or greater firepower (ref: Nevada to these conservatives that seem to be so wrought on legalities now).
What the unregulated militias have learned – and a growing number of citizens whose human rights are supported by nations that support those rights instead of using the words to condemn other nations are learning is that with overwhelming firepower you don’t really have to be all that concerned about legal or illegal including restraining over reaching Law Enforcement Officials who are equal or inferior in firepower. What works well in the streets of the USA for ARMED unregulated WHITE militias should work in the same manner with the same outcome for ARMED unregulated BLACK militias, otherwise foreign nations have the right to sanction the United States Government and support the efforts of ARMING USA unregulated FREEDOM FIGHTERS.
Dwendt44 August 21st, 2014 at 16:07
the ‘militarization of many police and sheriff’s depts gives them access to ‘fully automatic’ M-16/M-4 rifles and even machine guns mounted on APCs. Converting an M-15 to full auto takes three or four real small parts, and a good gunsmith doesn’t even need those. So the self-styled militia nuts can and some times do get the crazy idea that they too need these war weapons to fight off the hoards of rampaging minorities that might rise up any day now.
olf August 21st, 2014 at 19:51
Most conservative fire arm owners operate within the law. And are well safety mined people and will not fire unless the enemy fires first.
Self defend each other and as well as neighbors.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:18
An AR-15 would require some delicate machine work AND parts that are illegal to buy without proper licensing.
Dwendt44 August 22nd, 2014 at 12:22
Ya right. Any competent gunsmith can make the detent spring, and the minor machining of the two parts are easily done with a steady hand. It’s not as difficult as you think, or should I say, as you’d like us to believe.
a_bone_2_pick August 22nd, 2014 at 15:31
Retreating the sear is not an easy process if you want reliability – and it’s very, very illegal. If you knew anything about what you are speaking you would know 1) it’s not easy, 2) most people don’t have a clue as to how to do it, 3) you can’t just drop in the replacement parts for a M16 into a AR15, 4) it’s the kind of illegal that they will put you away for at least 10 years and that’s only if you have a very good and well paid lawyer.
Dwendt44 August 22nd, 2014 at 16:04
Me thinks you protest too much. It is not easy for the average Joe to do, I didn’t say it was. A proficient gunsmith is another matter. True, now a days, few know how. BUT it wasn’t that long ago you could learn how and maybe get the needed parts over the internet. Not today, as big brother is watching, but there are sources if you know where to look.
The trigger/hammer assembly from an M16 will, or it used to, drop right in to an AR15.
Sure it’s illegal. what’s that got to do with certain gun nuts that have a larger arsenal than many police departments that want the latest, best, biggest, hottest, and scariest weapons in his group.
Those so-called ‘patriots’ didn’t care that it was illegal to aim their AR-15s at federal agents in Nevada.
Those that stock pile many thousands of dollars in food, supplies, and ammo in the foolish anticipation of a never happen apocalypses aren’t all that concerned about silly laws. Some of them wish they could get bazookas and RPGs, assuming they don’t have some already.
a_bone_2_pick August 22nd, 2014 at 16:39
Um, well, the phrase “used to” means you are out of touch. As for a profecient gun smtih, well sure. But, it’s still illegal and if you as a gun smith get caught you are not going to get the 10 years I mentioned earlier.
As for “learning how” well, sure you can. But then you need the appropriate equipment and setup to apply that work. But, you are talking as though having a fully automatic weapon is some kind of magic talisman for death and destruction. Again, if you knew what you were talking about you would realize that full auto is primarily something used for enemy supression. Going full auto wastes a lot of ammo and is not a precise business. But, wait, since you want to go down this slippery slope that is not an issue because 1) the vast majority of people are not buying or seeking out fully automatic weapons, and 2) you can build your own lethal weapons after visiting the appropriate isles at the drug store and home depot.
You make this assertion “Sure it’s illegal. what’s that got to do with certain gun nuts that have a larger arsenal than many police departments that want the latest, best, biggest, hottest, and scariest weapons in his group.” So what? They aren’t illegal weapons unless they are criminals – get it? It would be worse if the “gun nuts” you are referring to were in fact criminals. But, that’s not the truth of the matter for the vast majority of them. Most are law-abiding people.
In fact, after reading this latest rant of yours I am convinced you need a little more gun-control training as your arguments are full of holes.
What in the world does the conflict in Nevada have to do with all of this topic? Are you saying that people shouldn’t be allowed to defend themselves? In that case those people were “peacefully” able to convince the “government” they weren’t going to allow the abuse they perceived to go on any longer. Maybe they were right, maybe they weren’t. But, the “government” decided they had better avoid pushing an already fed up population any farther by agitating the situation by confiscating more of that rancher’s cattle. In the end, the government was the bully and the people stood up to it. The government was effectively stealing from that rancher. The store owners in Ferguson told the looters there the same thing – no more.
AS for the rest of your nonsense – the RPGs etcetera, storing food for calamities was the norm for a long time for a lot of people. I am not sure how you think you’ve formed a well thought out argument by condemning those who would be worried about the condition of the world today given the current events? You’ve basically told me, and everyone reading, that you are against planning ahead and you think anyone who does is a nut job. I guess I have to ask you if you think that saving for retirement is a “nut job” type activity? After all, no one knows whether or not they will get to retire. In fact, it’s almost certain that no one will ever get to considering the condition of the nation and the fact that Social Security is there to support them if they ever need any assistance. I just wanted to point that little comparison out to you in case you didn’t see the parallel.
I am sure you are quite fun at parties and during family time on holidays.
a_bone_2_pick September 11th, 2014 at 17:14
Hmm, you think a protest in Nevada isn’t ok but what about Ferguson since you want to mix arguments and veer away from the point…
Sure lots of illegal things can be done. But, as soon as you start claiming someone who stock piles food for a emergency or calamity is a nutjob you just invalidated your entire argument. According to you, every animal that collects and stores food is a nutjob.
AS for your “certain nuts” those are few and far in between… You are as much of an alarmist as any other of the typical alarmist. Under the right circumstances you will be begging those “certain nuts” for help and protection.
Do yourself a favor and look into the legitimate topics of self-reliance and not the stuff coming out of reality TV or Hollywood.
You don’t have any idea of that which you speak.
Dawg August 29th, 2014 at 07:50
“Any competent gunsmith”……I’ve known several in my life and what they do is in no way easy. You’re downplaying the difficulty to try and prove your point.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 17:27
“Most people, I think, are for the Second Amendment right,” Lemon said, adding “Most people are. I am for that. I think people should be able to protect themselves” These gun zealots really should STFU. Lemon’s quote is proof that their destruction of the 2nd Amendment is complete, whether he understands the difference between automatic, fully automatic or semi automatic.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:09
It’s not close to complete, you have no contest. A weapon is nothing but a tool, to be used with care, wisdom and safety. No different than a hammer or screw driver.
Shadow August 25th, 2014 at 03:13
I’m confused…which one is the founding fathers against: fully automatic, semi automatic or both? Please cite the reference. Thanks.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 17:27
“Most people, I think, are for the Second Amendment right,” Lemon said, adding “Most people are. I am for that. I think people should be able to protect themselves” These gun zealots really should STFU. Lemon’s quote is proof that their destruction of the 2nd Amendment is complete, whether he understands the difference between automatic, fully automatic or semi automatic.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:09
It’s not close to complete, you have no contest. A weapon is nothing but a tool, to be used with care, wisdom and safety. No different than a hammer or screw driver.
Shadow August 25th, 2014 at 03:13
I’m confused…which one is the founding fathers against: fully automatic, semi automatic or both? Please cite the reference. Thanks.
Tommy6860 August 21st, 2014 at 18:11
What a butthead! I guess the saying “shoot first, then ask questions later”, is *automatic* for this nut-job .
Tommy6860 August 21st, 2014 at 18:11
What a butthead! I guess the saying “shoot first, then ask questions later”, is *automatic* for this nut-job .
Mammi_likeness August 21st, 2014 at 18:22
Wow, the level of ignorance about semi verses fully automatic, and the corresponding laws that govern the two different classes here in this story, and in these comments is monumental.
1. Full Automatic Weapons are governed buy the 1968 NFA. You have to pay a tax to get a fully automatic weapon. You have to obtain local approval by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer. The 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act banned the manufacture of civilian fully automatic weapons.
2. The cost of buying a fully automatic weapon built before 1986 is usually far beyond the financial reach of most civilians.
3. What the founding fathers had in mind was to prevent the government from preventing the people a way of defending themselves. If they were worried about specific types of weapons they would have included them at that time – otherwise they would have said something like, “except canons”. They made no such exceptions.
olford August 21st, 2014 at 19:43
One must be a fire arms dealer to buy fully automatic weapons.
Stronghold August 21st, 2014 at 20:52
That only applies to fully automatics manufactured after 1986. If it’s a registered pre-1986 machine gun any non-felon citizen living in a state that allows them can own it.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:15
If they pass a thorough background check annually and an expensive license renewal every year.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 21:44
“What the founding fathers had in mind was to prevent the government from preventing the people a way of defending themselves” Uhh, no. Not even close, except to fringe right wing idiots with the same level understanding of the Constitution as they do the bible.
A_Bone_2_Pick August 22nd, 2014 at 11:12
How appropriate – a denial of concept without any claim.
If you have a point it’s time to make it.
You claimed that’s not the purpose but didn’t state what you think it is. What are you, ignorant?
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 13:17
Thank You Sir. Let’s take truth. It rather burns the ears around hear, but hey truth is truth. No playing childish professor games, this is real life.
Anomaly 100 August 21st, 2014 at 21:50
You’re upvoting your own comments. You must need a hug. Aww!
A_Bone_2_Pick August 22nd, 2014 at 11:10
Yo! Delta Bravo! What do you think now with a mere two votes to her six? Out of the people who voted for her, she got 75% of the vote. That’s a landslide compared to your meager 25%. If you had voted for yourself at least you could claim 33%.
Nice!
Mammi_likeness August 21st, 2014 at 18:22
Wow, the level of ignorance about semi verses fully automatic, and the corresponding laws that govern the two different classes here in this story, and in these comments is monumental.
1. Full Automatic Weapons are governed buy the 1968 NFA. You have to pay a tax to get a fully automatic weapon. You have to obtain local approval by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer. The 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act banned the manufacture of new civilian fully automatic weapons.
2. The cost of buying a fully automatic weapon built before 1986 is usually far beyond the financial reach of most civilians.
3. What the founding fathers had in mind was to prevent the government from preventing the people a way of defending themselves. If they were worried about specific types of weapons they would have included them at that time – otherwise they would have said something like, “except canons”. They made no such exceptions.
olf August 21st, 2014 at 19:43
One must be a fire arms dealer to buy fully automatic weapons.
Stronghold August 21st, 2014 at 20:52
That only applies to fully automatics manufactured after 1986. If it’s a registered pre-1986 machine gun any non-felon citizen living in a state that allows them can own it.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:15
If they pass a thorough background check annually and an expensive license renewal every year.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 21:44
“What the founding fathers had in mind was to prevent the government from preventing the people a way of defending themselves” Uhh, no. Not even close, except to fringe right wing idiots with the same level understanding of the Constitution as they do the bible.
a_bone_2_pick August 22nd, 2014 at 11:12
How appropriate – a denial of concept without any claim.
If you have a point it’s time to make it.
You claimed that’s not the purpose but didn’t state what you think it is. What are you, ignorant?
Would you like to reconcile the following statement?
“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that… it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
–Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824.
and maybe…
“No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements).”
–Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution with (his note added), 1776. Papers, 1:353
and what about…
“It is more a subject of joy [than of regret] that we have so few of the desperate characters which compose modern regular armies. But it proves more forcibly the necessity of obliging every citizen to be a soldier; this was the case with the Greeks and Romans and must be that of every free State. Where there is no oppression there can be no pauper hirelings.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1813.
and finally (just because I don’t feel like looking up anymore resources that contradict your baseless claim)…
“That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.”– Madison’s Introduction of the Bill of Rights June 8, 1789.
So, there are numerous examples of the discussion about the second amendment with language that indicates the right to bear arms was a multifaceted stopgap to enable the people to help protect themselves from many threats notwithstanding the idea that the power granted to the government is by the will of the people. Thus, it (in a simplified form) is a measure to ensure the government or other threats from invaders (which are generally sponsored by governments) can be defended against by the people which is what the nation is made up from.
You need to articulate what it is that you think is different if you think there is something in there that says something else. Otherwise you are using a version of the “nuhuh, cause I said so”, counter-argument.
So, belly-up to the bar. You moderators want a debate – there you are. Start debating.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 13:17
Thank You Sir. Let’s talk truth. It rather burns the ears around hear, but hey truth is truth. No playing childish professor games, this is real life.
Anomaly 100 August 21st, 2014 at 21:50
You’re upvoting your own comments. You must need a hug. Aww!
a_bone_2_pick August 22nd, 2014 at 11:10
Yo! Delta Bravo! What do you think now with a mere two votes to her six? Out of the people who voted for her, she got 75% of the vote. That’s a landslide compared to your meager 25%. If you had voted for yourself at least you could claim 33%.
Nice!
Paul Jacques August 21st, 2014 at 18:57
Facts matter and the media, both Liberal and Conservative and equally ignorant. If it was my job to report the news I’d be damn sure I did my homework. But they don’t have to because the sheeple just hear whatever strident tones they resonant with. Left or Right, they’re both wrong. An Automatic Weapon means you hold down the rigger and it will fire repeatedly until you release the trigger. In for a gun gun to be an Assault weapon it must have automatic capability and a removable magazine. Otherwise it’s just a scary-looking gun that sends some people into a frenzy at the mere image of it. They cannot be legally purchased or owned by average citizens. A semi-automatic gun requires the user to pull the trigger each time he or she desires to fire the weapon. They are legal to purchase and the number of hoops required to purchase one vary by state. Many hoops if you live in California where I do.
whatthe46 August 21st, 2014 at 19:28
“In for a gun gun to be an Assault weapon it must have automatic capability and a removable magazine. Otherwise it’s just a scary-looking gun that sends some people into a frenzy at the mere image of it. They cannot be legally purchased or owned by average citizens.” “legally” here’s the problem, they are owned by citizens, may not be “legally” owned, but owned non-the-less. there have been cases where cops were arrested for stealing weapons from the evidence room and selling them out of their trunks.
olford August 21st, 2014 at 19:42
That is hear say, can you please show the names and dates.
whatthe46 August 21st, 2014 at 20:17
You asked…
Patrolman David Earl Black, 43, of Mechanicsburg, and retired officer Frank Peskie, 59, of Highspire, were both property management officers in charge of handling evidence for the department. Peskie retired about 10 years ago after about 30 years of service. Black has been with the force about 20 years.
*******
A federal investigation is under way to determine whether some 500 weapons missing from a police department’s evidence room are part of an illegal firearms-trafficking scheme. Court records show ATF agents recovered 112 of the missing guns while executing a search warrant at a Humble gun shop. Court documents connect Capt. Harold Kelley of the Liberty County sheriff’s department and others to a gun-trafficking scheme. As custodian of the police department’s evidence room, Kelley possessed one of two keys. The other key was held by Henry Patterson, who was serving at the time as Cleveland’s assistant police chief.
*********
futhermore, you requested dates: why does that matter? it happened.
Houston Officer Harry Kelley & former Cleveland Police Officer.
During the weapons count, officers recorded fewer than 50 weapons in the property room. Court records show just two years before, there were 10 times as many. The indictment claims while Kelley drafted disposal orders for firearms, he never actually had them destroyed. Instead, court documents say he sold them to Gary Lee, the owner of a gun store.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:04
Out of all the thousands of police in this country what % is that in the over welming numbers of good police. ?? .0001, .0002. ??
Mammi_likeness August 24th, 2014 at 07:17
That’s 3 out of 648,000 law enforcement officers. Do you want to know the percentage that represents?
0.0004%
Don’t you think it’s a little hard to screen out every possible instance of dishonesty in any human institution? After all, if all people were good and fair we wouldn’t need guns at all, would we?
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:15
There have been more cases of drugs stolen and sold out of trunks.
Paul Jacques August 21st, 2014 at 18:57
Facts matter and the media, both Liberal and Conservative and equally ignorant. If it was my job to report the news I’d be damn sure I did my homework. But they don’t have to because the sheeple just hear whatever strident tones they resonant with. Left or Right, they’re both wrong. An Automatic Weapon means you hold down the rigger and it will fire repeatedly until you release the trigger. In for a gun gun to be an Assault weapon it must have automatic capability and a removable magazine. Otherwise it’s just a scary-looking gun that sends some people into a frenzy at the mere image of it. They cannot be legally purchased or owned by average citizens. A semi-automatic gun requires the user to pull the trigger each time he or she desires to fire the weapon. They are legal to purchase and the number of hoops required to purchase one vary by state. Many hoops if you live in California where I do.
whatthe46 August 21st, 2014 at 19:28
“In for a gun gun to be an Assault weapon it must have automatic capability and a removable magazine. Otherwise it’s just a scary-looking gun that sends some people into a frenzy at the mere image of it. They cannot be legally purchased or owned by average citizens.” “legally” here’s the problem, they are owned by citizens, may not be “legally” owned, but owned non-the-less. there have been cases where cops were arrested for stealing weapons from the evidence room and selling them out of their trunks.
olf August 21st, 2014 at 19:42
That is hear say, can you please show the names and dates.
whatthe46 August 21st, 2014 at 20:17
You asked…
Patrolman David Earl Black, 43, of Mechanicsburg, and retired officer Frank Peskie, 59, of Highspire, were both property management officers in charge of handling evidence for the department. Peskie retired about 10 years ago after about 30 years of service. Black has been with the force about 20 years.
*******
A federal investigation is under way to determine whether some 500 weapons missing from a police department’s evidence room are part of an illegal firearms-trafficking scheme. Court records show ATF agents recovered 112 of the missing guns while executing a search warrant at a Humble gun shop. Court documents connect Capt. Harold Kelley of the Liberty County sheriff’s department and others to a gun-trafficking scheme. As custodian of the police department’s evidence room, Kelley possessed one of two keys. The other key was held by Henry Patterson, who was serving at the time as Cleveland’s assistant police chief.
*********
futhermore, you requested dates: why does that matter? it happened.
Houston Officer Harry Kelley & former Cleveland Police Officer.
During the weapons count, officers recorded fewer than 50 weapons in the property room. Court records show just two years before, there were 10 times as many. The indictment claims while Kelley drafted disposal orders for firearms, he never actually had them destroyed. Instead, court documents say he sold them to Gary Lee, the owner of a gun store.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:04
Out of all the thousands of police in this country what % is that in the overwhelming numbers of good police. ?? .0001, .0002. ??
Mammi_likeness August 24th, 2014 at 07:17
That’s 3 out of 648,000 law enforcement officers. Do you want to know the percentage that represents?
0.0004%
Don’t you think it’s a little hard to screen out every possible instance of dishonesty in any human institution? After all, if all people were good and fair we wouldn’t need guns at all, would we?
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:15
There have been more cases of drugs stolen and sold out of trunks.
LaughingGrizzly August 21st, 2014 at 19:49
What an ignorant article….
Obewon August 22nd, 2014 at 00:20
Ignorance always oozes from anything Ben Ferguson says, or any of the Breitbart.conjobs e.g. John Nolte.
Video of Chicken Hawk Ben Ferguson Who Still Hasn’t Learned Anything Since Being Pummeled By U.S. Military Veteran Randi Rhodes. http://crooksandliars.com/heather/chicken-hawk-ben-ferguson-still-hasnt-lear
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 01:06
We can all unite on common ground of right / wrong principles of the universe. Can’t we ? Truth is truth. Human beings can treat each other with respect. Without truth and fact finding how can anyone move to righteousness for all humans that strive for peace for a higher level living.
LaughingGrizzly August 22nd, 2014 at 06:47
What should be focused upon (instead of going down this bunny trail) is why are local police departments armed to the teeth, as if they are storming Baghdad. Evidently, the Left doesn’t give a flying f about our rights being stripped away, along as it for the “common good”. I fair to say that other countries don’t hate us for our freedoms!
LaughingGrizzly August 21st, 2014 at 19:49
What an ignorant article….
Obewon August 22nd, 2014 at 00:20
Ignorance always oozes from anything Ben Ferguson says, or any of the Breitbart.conjobs e.g. John Nolte.
Video of Chicken Hawk Ben Ferguson Who Still Hasn’t Learned Anything Since Being Pummeled By U.S. Military Veteran Randi Rhodes. http://crooksandliars.com/heather/chicken-hawk-ben-ferguson-still-hasnt-lear
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 01:06
We can all unite on common ground of right / wrong principles of the universe. Can’t we ? Truth is truth. Human beings can treat each other with respect. Without truth and fact finding how can anyone move to righteousness for all humans that strive for peace for a higher level living.
LaughingGrizzly August 22nd, 2014 at 06:47
What should be focused upon (instead of going down this bunny trail) is why are local police departments armed to the teeth, as if they are storming Baghdad. Evidently, the Left doesn’t give a flying f about our rights being stripped away, along as it for the “common good”. I fair to say that other countries don’t hate us for our freedoms!
olford August 21st, 2014 at 19:52
Some how the F bombs sound like a prison talk not adults discussing issues.
olf August 21st, 2014 at 19:52
Some how the F bombs sound like a prison talk not adults discussing issues.
hbbill August 21st, 2014 at 20:13
Lemons….HEY aren’t those the rodents that run off the cliffs in Norway?
SNARK aside Mr. Lemon, you said this;
“But if you’re going to be honest about it, I don’t think our founding fathers had these automatic weapons and military-style weapons in mind when the Second Amendment was drafted.”
That’s EXACTLY what they had in mind sir. The Founders/Minutemen at the start of the war actually had better rifles than the British. After the war they wanted the citizen to have small arms on a par with the army of the day should the need to use them in that manner ever arise again. Today’s semi-automatic sporting rifle with a standard capacity magazine is the modern day equivalent of the rifles the Founders carried….think of it as a modern musket if you will carried by modern day Minutemen.
Just what is it that you want to do to us Mr. and Ms. Liberal that you want to take away our guns so badly?
M D Reese August 21st, 2014 at 21:21
The founding fathers also wanted these citizen soldiers and their weapons to be well-regulated. What do you want us to do about that Mr. or Mrs. gunnut?
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:01
Nothing. There are by far more law abiding citizens than bad people. Check the facts. FYI When we can get the bad actors out the gun business we will have done the right thing.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:50
And who is working on that? (…crickets…)
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:53
Well, we are trying to keep the government out of that business – Fast and Furious…
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:11
Well-regulated means well trained and weapons in proper working order, not that the government gets to control them.
M D Reese August 23rd, 2014 at 00:26
It seems to mean a whole lot of things to a whole lot of people. But whatever it may mean to YOU, the Second Amendment DOES allow for gun regulation, and I say let’s get to it.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 08:00
Ok, so what’s suggestion #1?
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:46
Universal background checks. And no, we don’t already have them.
R.J. Carter August 28th, 2014 at 16:50
Something which most gun owners support, including me.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:52
Exactly. You’d think that all “responsible” gun owners would want that. It’s just a vicious circle with the NRA–they claim to want to keep guns out of the hands of bad guys, but will not allow any tools to do just that.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:51
“Universal” makes a national (universal) gun registry unconstitutional. See the 10th Amendment. If you don’t like that then change the 10th Amendment.
As for what can and can’t be bought, licensing requirements, insurance, etc… All governed by the 10th as well. You are asking to uncork a genie that you won’t like once it’s out.
OldLefty August 27th, 2014 at 07:04
Well-regulated means well trained and weapons in proper working order
_________
From Chap. ⅩⅩⅩⅢ.—An Act more effectually to provide
for the National Defence by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.
Approved, May 8, 1792.
That the said militia shall be officered by the respective states, as follows: To each division, one major-general and two aids-de-camp, with the rank of major; to each brigade, one brigadier-general, with one brigade inspector, to serve also
as brigade-major, with the rank of a major; to each regiment, one lieutenant-colonel commandant; and to each battalion one major; to each company one captain, one lieutenant, one ensign, four sergeants, four corporals, one drummer and one fifer or bugler. That there shall be a regimental staff, to consist of
1803, ch. 15, sec. 3.
one adjutant and one quartermaster, to rank as lieutenants; one paymaster; one surgeon, and one surgeon’s mate; one sergeant-major; one drum-major, and one fife-major.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted,
Each battalion to have one company of grenadiers, &c. and one company of artillery.
That out of the militia enrolled, as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion at least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that to each division there shall be at least one company of artillery, and one troop of horse: there shall be to each company of artillery, one captain, two lieutenants, four sergeants, four corporals, six gunners, six bombadiers, one drummer, and one fifer.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:11
Gee, that sounds mighty restrictive, and, well, regulated! (snark)
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:10
Yeah, and “gun control” means using both hands. I’ve read enough of the bumper stickers.
Mammi_likeness August 24th, 2014 at 07:10
Well, if you think about that idea then you would realize the amount of regulation currently exercised on gun ownership meets that criteria. It’s illegal for anyone who does not qualify to own a gun to actually own a gun. As for other regulations, well, you can’t have fully automatic weapons unless you are properly licensed and approved, you can’t own explosives, short barreled shot guns are not allowed, you have to pass a background check when buying from a dealer. A private individual is not permitted to sell a weapon to anyone who is not eligible to own a weapon.
I think those qualify as “well regulated”…
M D Reese August 24th, 2014 at 16:42
Well, those are the ammosexual talking points. It is not the reality. About 40% of guns are purchased without any background check. In other words, anybody can buy any damn gun they want to and there’s no enforcement. There is no regulation in the real world.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 05:05
Isn’t it just like a liberal to start with the name calling right of the bat? What next? Are you going to call her a racis0t?
And why aren’t you advocating for enforcement of the laws as they stand? You do realize that it is illegal to sell guns to someone who is otherwise not qualified to own one, and it is illegal to sell illegal guns of design?
I mean, are you going to try and convince me that it’s not illegal to do those things?
Please…
OldLefty August 27th, 2014 at 06:21
Isn’t it just like a liberal to start with the name calling right of the bat?
_______
Are you accusing MD of using the conservative’s tactics?
Likely he is talking about gun shows.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 07:35
Hmm, why don’t you let him respond for himself?
As for conservative tactics, I responded with a legitimate counter-argument. There are no insults to be found within it. And then you come along and make another false accusation. You and he have thrown around accusations without any evidence. That makes you (and MD) the offender(s) which ultimately makes it even harder to believe because it’s apparent that you are lying.
It’s pointless to debate with you when you make claims without evidence. The truth is you don’t care about the topic – you just want to fling insults. How can we have a legitimate conversation if the first the both of you do is start out with an unsubstantiated claim and then you don’t even address the points already made? On this topic you act as though there is no one one the right side where they do want to make sure someone who isn’t legitimately eligible to purchase/possess a firearm does the right thing and makes sure the person they are selling to is n ot a risk. Why is it that everyone in your universe is breaking the law? And then you come here to further insult me without knowing the first thing?
Do you think the people who you insult by suggesting they aren’t responsibly selling, and the people who come into a forum like this and challenge your false blanket accusations are going to take your lies and insults lying down?
And don ‘t deny it. I can copy and paste thousands of examples demonstrating these phenomena – starting with the first two right here in this series of comments.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:09
Here it is–You are just trolling.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:17
Typical liberal response – dismiss the individual when confronted with incontrovertible facts and counter-arguments.
You’re a coward.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:04
Where I live, I could arm a small insurrection by shopping the want ads and garage sales–no questions asked, no paperwork done.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:08
Oh please your own self. What gun laws we have are full of loopholes. We may as well not have any. As for enforcement, yeah right. The NRA and gun manufacturers won’t even allow the CDC to study gun deaths in this country even though it is epidemic. As for ammosexuals–that is what they are. They’ve got guns for dicks and bullets for brains.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:26
First, there are laws that govern these activities. If there are loop holes you should be advocating to amend the laws to close the loopholes. Your argument is full of holes.
And as for what the CDC can or cannot study, please send some valid evidence to support your accusations. The last time I checked the CDC does have data and studies on this topic. It took me all of three seconds to go find one of the studies. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
If you are going to spout nonsense and use name-calling as a defense you are going to lose the debate.
Again, I stand by my original assessment – you are like a typical liberal, no facts, only pejoratives.
M D Reese September 19th, 2014 at 17:48
Oh pulleeze your own self. It’s pointless to have laws that only cover about 40-50% of sales, and to not FUND the enforcement agencies responsible for enforcing the pathetic laws that we do have. The GOPTP filibusters and blocks any funding for enforcement, and they filibuster and block any and all appointments of department heads. you can’t have it both ways: “we already have laws” and “hell no we won’t fund the agencies that enforce those laws”.
As for advocating for enforcement–I ALREADY AM FOR ENFORCING GUN LAWS.
Mammi_likeness September 19th, 2014 at 10:52
Oh, I guess every one of those background checks conducted, as well as all the laws on the books are not regulation. You lose on definition alone.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 21:47
OK, then. You just keep getting your history lessons from the NRA History Channel.
olford August 21st, 2014 at 23:53
Why do you have a problim with the National Rifle Assoiation ? You must be racsist. The NRA was formed to arm the black population after the civil war by the republincan party so they could protect themselves.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 00:06
The ignorance just oozes from your head.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:19
Sorry to burst your bubble.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 00:46
LOL! You haven’t, you just confirmed for me, once again the ignorance of the fringe right wing with your nonsensical comments.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 00:54
I missed the dates. Civil rights 1866. NRA founding 1871.
Civil rights reversed 1875 by the democrat / KKK groups.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 18:35
Truth is so much more fun.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 19:05
Try it sometime.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:09
You know it’s a “high quality” site when a moderator repeatedly calls a commenter stupid for telling the truth.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 11:07
We know who the trolls are when they make comments like yours.
olford August 22nd, 2014 at 13:10
Yes Sir. The truth trolls have come to town.
Dawg August 29th, 2014 at 07:52
You got one thing right oaf, I tell the truth, liberals hate that.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 17:29
This is obviously a site ran by trolls.
mea_mark August 22nd, 2014 at 17:56
It sure is, so if you don’t like it, please leave so we don’t have to ban you.
Dawg August 23rd, 2014 at 12:52
Ban me then! Liberal cowards afraid of hearing the truth. You’re like middle school girls, start name calling and shun whoever says anything opposing you.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 19:05
Well, no, but we do tolerate low value contributions like yours.
fahvel August 22nd, 2014 at 02:58
you know the rod they used to tamp the wad and the ball into their musket??? Take it and place it in your brain cavity – but don’t sit down too fast – or, why not?
hbbill August 21st, 2014 at 20:13
Lemons….HEY aren’t those the rodents that run off the cliffs in Norway?
SNARK aside Mr. Lemon, you said this;
“But if you’re going to be honest about it, I don’t think our founding fathers had these automatic weapons and military-style weapons in mind when the Second Amendment was drafted.”
That’s EXACTLY what they had in mind sir. The Founders/Minutemen at the start of the war actually had better rifles than the British. After the war they wanted the citizen to have small arms on a par with the army of the day should the need to use them in that manner ever arise again. Today’s semi-automatic sporting rifle with a standard capacity magazine is the modern day equivalent of the rifles the Founders carried….think of it as a modern musket if you will carried by modern day Minutemen.
Just what is it that you want to do to us Mr. and Ms. Liberal that you want to take away our guns so badly?
M D Reese August 21st, 2014 at 21:21
The founding fathers also wanted these citizen soldiers and their weapons to be well-regulated. What do you want us to do about that Mr. or Mrs. gunnut?
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:01
Nothing. There are by far more law abiding citizens than bad people. Check the facts. FYI When we can get the bad actors out the gun business we will have done the right thing.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:50
And who is working on that? (…crickets…)
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:53
Well, we are trying to keep the government out of that business – Fast and Furious…
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:11
Well-regulated means well trained and weapons in proper working order, not that the government gets to control them.
M D Reese August 23rd, 2014 at 00:26
It seems to mean a whole lot of things to a whole lot of people. But whatever it may mean to YOU, the Second Amendment DOES allow for gun regulation, and I say let’s get to it.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 08:00
Ok, so what’s suggestion #1?
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:46
Universal background checks for purchasing guns. And no, we don’t already have them. Universal registration of all guns, mandatory training/licensing with testing requirements, mandatory liability insurance, limits on what weapons can be purchased by civilians–there’s a lot of things we can do.
R.J. Carter August 28th, 2014 at 16:50
Something which most gun owners support, including me.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 16:52
Exactly. You’d think that all “responsible” gun owners would want that. It’s just a vicious circle with the NRA–they claim to want to keep guns out of the hands of bad guys and the mentally ill, but will not allow any tools to do just that. If you haven’t read George H W Bush’s resignation letter from the NRA, it’s worth a look. I believe it was after the Oklahoma City bombing.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:51
“Universal” makes a national (universal) gun registry unconstitutional. See the 10th Amendment. If you don’t like that then change the 10th Amendment.
As for what can and can’t be bought, licensing requirements, insurance, etc… All governed by the 10th as well. You are asking to uncork a genie that you won’t like once it’s out.
OldLefty August 27th, 2014 at 07:04
Well-regulated means well trained and weapons in proper working order
_________
From Chap. ⅩⅩⅩⅢ.—An Act more effectually to provide
for the National Defence by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.
Approved, May 8, 1792.
That the said militia shall be officered by the respective states, as follows: To each division, one major-general and two aids-de-camp, with the rank of major; to each brigade, one brigadier-general, with one brigade inspector, to serve also
as brigade-major, with the rank of a major; to each regiment, one lieutenant-colonel commandant; and to each battalion one major; to each company one captain, one lieutenant, one ensign, four sergeants, four corporals, one drummer and one fifer or bugler. That there shall be a regimental staff, to consist of
1803, ch. 15, sec. 3.
one adjutant and one quartermaster, to rank as lieutenants; one paymaster; one surgeon, and one surgeon’s mate; one sergeant-major; one drum-major, and one fife-major.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted,
Each battalion to have one company of grenadiers, &c. and one company of artillery.
That out of the militia enrolled, as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion at least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that to each division there shall be at least one company of artillery, and one troop of horse: there shall be to each company of artillery, one captain, two lieutenants, four sergeants, four corporals, six gunners, six bombadiers, one drummer, and one fifer.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:11
Gee, that sounds mighty restrictive, and, well, regulated! (snark)
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:10
Yeah, and “gun control” means using both hands. I’ve read enough of the bumper stickers.
Mammi_likeness August 24th, 2014 at 07:10
Well, if you think about that idea then you would realize the amount of regulation currently exercised on gun ownership meets that criteria. It’s illegal for anyone who does not qualify to own a gun to actually own a gun. As for other regulations, well, you can’t have fully automatic weapons unless you are properly licensed and approved, you can’t own explosives, short barreled shot guns are not allowed, you have to pass a background check when buying from a dealer. A private individual is not permitted to sell a weapon to anyone who is not eligible to own a weapon.
I think those qualify as “well regulated”…
M D Reese August 24th, 2014 at 16:42
Well, those are the ammosexual talking points. It is not the reality. About 40% of guns are purchased without any background check. In other words, anybody can buy any damn gun they want to and there’s no enforcement. There is no regulation in the real world.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 05:05
Isn’t it just like a liberal to start with the name calling right of the bat? What next? Are you going to call her a racist?
And why aren’t you advocating for enforcement of the laws as they stand? You do realize that it is illegal to sell guns to someone who is otherwise not qualified to own one, and it is illegal to sell illegal guns of design?
I mean, are you going to try and convince me that it’s not illegal to do those things?
Please…
OldLefty August 27th, 2014 at 06:21
Isn’t it just like a liberal to start with the name calling right of the bat?
_______
Are you accusing MD of using the conservative’s tactics?
Likely he is talking about gun shows.
InsaniaFactusMirus August 27th, 2014 at 07:35
Hmm, why don’t you let him respond for himself?
As for conservative tactics, I responded with a legitimate counter-argument. There are no insults to be found within it. And then you come along and make another false accusation. You and he have thrown around accusations without any evidence. That makes you (and MD) the offender(s) which ultimately makes it even harder to believe because it’s apparent that you are lying.
It’s pointless to debate with you when you make claims without evidence. The truth is you don’t care about the topic – you just want to fling insults. How can we have a legitimate conversation if the first the both of you do is start out with an unsubstantiated claim and then you don’t even address the points already made? On this topic you act as though there is no one one the right side where they do want to make sure someone who isn’t legitimately eligible to purchase/possess a firearm does the right thing and makes sure the person they are selling to is n ot a risk. Why is it that everyone in your universe is breaking the law? And then you come here to further insult me without knowing the first thing?
Do you think the people who you insult by suggesting they aren’t responsibly selling, and the people who come into a forum like this and challenge your false blanket accusations are going to take your lies and insults lying down?
And don ‘t deny it. I can copy and paste thousands of examples demonstrating these phenomena – starting with the first two right here in this series of comments.
Next you are going to claim I don’t care about the people who are harmed by the illegitimate trade of guns which is another absurd lie. If I didn’t I could go out and sell all mine for 3-4 times their actual value tomorrow! And then turn around and buy more to do the same thing with day after day. But, I don’t do that because, 1) I am a law abiding citizen, and 2) I don’t want to see people who shouldn’t have guns get them at all, and 3) cause (despite all the claims) I know I will go to jail because it is illegal to sell a weapon to someone who is not eligible and the test to determine whether or not I knew Jimmy-Joe-Bob wasn’t a) old enough, b) was a convicted felon, c) not a legal resident, d) under indictment for domestic abuse e) on drugs, f) or ruled psychologically unfit by the court is because I won’t get to claim (nor would I) ignorance. Ignorance is no excuse to the law.
After all this you are going to cite some case where Jimmy-Joe-Bob got a gun illegally and used it on a mother and her to ADHD children as an example that is supposed to disprove all I have written and everything else ever written by anyone in defense of the 2nd Amendment.
I will call this anecdotal evidence as there are a lot of things out there that happen to everyday people at the hands of those who would be from the lot in life we don’t want having guns, running around loose, or even voting. Sure, ok, why can’t you argue the point without standing on the graves of victims. You’re going to use people to bully the argument. I could pull out the stops and show dozens of examples of how unarmed people tore innocents apart with their bare hands, knife attacks, drunk drivers, rape, blunt force trauma, being thrown off buildings, immolation, etc,. But, I don’t use bully tactics. I argue the points.
Why can’t you?
Next you are going to claim I am some sort of white, protestant, Anglo-Saxon who is drunk half the time and watching football the other (if not at church where I pray to a magic sky-God). You are going to try and slander me into a corner and all the while you really ought to be saying if there are laws that clearly say it’s illegal to sell a weapon to someone who is not eligible, how can we enforce them without destroying the individual’s right to property?
But, you aren’t interested in that are you? That requires that you actually argue the points and refrain from insults, doesn’t it?
Yeah, I will be awaiting your thoughtful response.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:09
Here it is–You are just trolling.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:17
Typical liberal response – dismiss the individual when confronted with incontrovertible facts and counter-arguments.
You’re a coward.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:04
Where I live, I could arm a small insurrection by shopping the want ads and garage sales–no questions asked, no paperwork done.
M D Reese August 28th, 2014 at 17:08
Oh please your own self. What gun laws we have are full of loopholes. We may as well not have any. As for enforcement, yeah right. The NRA and gun manufacturers won’t even allow the CDC to study gun deaths in this country even though it is epidemic. As for ammosexuals–that is what they are. They’ve got guns for dicks and bullets for brains.
InsaniaFactusMirus September 11th, 2014 at 02:26
First, there are laws that govern these activities. If there are loop holes you should be advocating to amend the laws to close the loopholes. Your argument is full of holes.
And as for what the CDC can or cannot study, please send some valid evidence to support your accusations. The last time I checked the CDC does have data and studies on this topic. It took me all of three seconds to go find one of the studies. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
If you are going to spout nonsense and use name-calling as a defense you are going to lose the debate.
Again, I stand by my original assessment – you are like a typical liberal, no facts, only pejoratives.
M D Reese September 19th, 2014 at 17:48
Oh pulleeze your own self. It’s pointless to have laws that only cover about 40-50% of sales, and to not FUND the enforcement agencies responsible for enforcing the pathetic laws that we do have. The GOPTP filibusters and blocks any funding for enforcement, and they filibuster and block any and all appointments of department heads. you can’t have it both ways: “we already have laws” and “hell no we won’t fund the agencies that enforce those laws”.
As for advocating for enforcement–I ALREADY AM FOR ENFORCING GUN LAWS.
tiredoftea August 21st, 2014 at 21:47
OK, then. You just keep getting your history lessons from the NRA History Channel.
olf August 21st, 2014 at 23:53
Why do you have a problim with the National Rifle Assoiation ? You must be rascist. The NRA was formed to arm the black population after the civil war by the republincan party so they could protect themselves.
Did you know our black brothers and sisters had civil rights after the civil war until 1871 when the democratic party took over the congress where they reversed those laws and took away their civil rights. FYI
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 00:06
The ignorance just oozes from your head.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:19
Sorry to burst your bubble.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 00:46
LOL! You haven’t, you just confirmed for me, once again the ignorance of the fringe right wing with your nonsensical comments.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 00:54
I missed the dates. Civil rights 1866. NRA founding 1871.
Civil rights reversed 1875 by the democrat / KKK groups.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 18:35
Truth is so much more fun.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 19:05
Try it sometime.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 05:09
You know it’s a “high quality” site when a moderator repeatedly calls a commenter stupid for telling the truth.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 11:07
We know who the trolls are when they make comments like yours.
olf August 22nd, 2014 at 13:10
Yes Sir. The truth trolls have come to town.
Dawg August 29th, 2014 at 07:52
You got one thing right oaf, I tell the truth, liberals hate that.
Dawg August 22nd, 2014 at 17:29
This is obviously a site ran by trolls.
mea_mark August 22nd, 2014 at 17:56
It sure is, so if you don’t like it, please leave so we don’t have to ban you.
Dawg August 23rd, 2014 at 12:52
Ban me then! Liberal cowards afraid of hearing the truth. You’re like middle school girls, start name calling and shun whoever says anything opposing you.
tiredoftea August 22nd, 2014 at 19:05
Well, no, but we do tolerate low value contributions like yours.
fahvel August 22nd, 2014 at 02:58
you know the rod they used to tamp the wad and the ball into their musket??? Take it and place it in your brain cavity – but don’t sit down too fast – or, why not?
Jim Smith August 22nd, 2014 at 00:29
OMG, Tommy Christopher, the author of this idiotic spunk is even dumber that Don Lemon if that is even possible