Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin and State Rep. Robin Kelly: We Won’t Stop Disarming Until You’re Disarmed

aren’tSenator Dick Durbin (courtesy progressillinois.com)

“The horrific mass shooting in Orlando was the deadliest in our nation’s history. In response, this week Democrats in both the House and the Senate said ENOUGH, and demanded action to stem the rising tide of gun violence in our country,” Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and State Representative Robin Kelly write over at huffingtonpost.com. Illusory rising tide aside, the pols penned their anti-gun agitprop to help Americans see the Orlando spree killing in its proper perspective. Well, their perspective. Like this:

What happened in Orlando on Sunday was shocking, and our hearts are broken for the victims and their loved ones. And while the scale of these mass shootings captures the nation’s attention, the carnage caused by guns on the streets of Chicago every day is no less tragic. More than 280 people have been killed in this great city since the first of the year. Thousands more are living under siege in neighborhoods where they fear sitting on their front porches or letting their kids out to play because of the threat of gun violence.

No one in the United States of America should ever have to live this way.

True! No one should have to live in fear of “gun violence”! The best way not to be a victim is to shoot back. No really. Tool-up against the bad guys and stop the threat. This is my gay club. This is my front porch. Those are my kids. Mess with them and you answer to me. And I mean, right now.

That said, the “more guns” solution is better suited to gay clubs than Chicago ‘hoods. Gang bangers shooting gang bangers is “gun violence” problem number one in The Windy City. I don’t suppose gun-carrying porch sitters are going to stop stray gangland gunfire. If Durbin and Kelly have their way we’ll never know.

Establishing universal background checks and closing this terrorist gun loophole will help keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, the mentally unstable and individuals with ties to terrorism. This should be done now as a matter of national security and public safety. This is a starting point. We know that much more must be done to keep guns out of dangerous hands, and that the appalling gun violence in Orlando and here in Chicago is the consequence of inaction.

The pursuit of gun reform is personal for us. And we won’t stop — not until all Americans everywhere can live free from the threat of gun violence.

Is that a threat or a promise? Yes. It’s a threat to disarm all law-abiding Americans and a promise to create government tyranny for your own damn good. You have been warned.

comments

  1. avatar Dev says:

    War on the American people and war on our freedoms. People will give them away willingly too all because of an irrational fear and a belief in the lie that is absolute security.

  2. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    1) Chicago should be placed in state of emergency and they should get the police and national guard to arrest and jail all known active gang members, drug dealers, and murderers.

    Then use the money wasted in lotteries and fix the schools and education system.

    2) Any politician that tries to assign guilt and legal infringement and penalties to law-abiding gun owners because of the actions of a terrorist or criminal needs to be immediately removed from office and the process by which these morons get into office needs reform.

    3) How we, as a society, are educated and trained to handle terrorist incidences needs reform. “Stay put and hide” is not a valid strategy in most cases.

    4) We need to reject the notion that being a victim is a lifestyle without consequences.

    Your safety is your personal responsibility, no one else’s. You have the option to protect yourself (in most free states) and if you choose not avail of the opportunity, then whatever happens to you in an attack is no one else’s fault. Stop trying to blame your circumstances on other people — let alone those that were not responsible.

    1. avatar Chicago Steve says:

      You can’t do number one, otherwise democrats wouldn’t have anybody to vote for them.

      This is funny, but let’s face it there’s also truth in this.

      Finally, it’s laughable the Dick Durbin, from Illinois is espousing universal background checks. Illinois already has universal background checks……..so that must mean that people are breaking the law and not being prosecuted.

      I would suggest that we start with journalists who make movies and commit illegal transfers or hold 30 round magazines on TV in Washington DC. You put a couple highly visible people in jail, that will do more than anything else.

  3. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    More lies from the lying liars. The Orlando shooter passed a background check. Repeatedly. So what good would “universal background checks”, aka, a ban on private sale of firearms, have? None.

    Prior to the Orlando shooting, the Orlando shooter had not been convicted of any terrorist crime. He’d not been charged with any terrorist crime. He’d never even been arrested for any terrorist crime. So what’s this “terrorist loophole” the Senator refers to? He wants people that the FBI and Attorney General suspect might be involved in a crime to be stripped of the Constititional rights without any due process. Well.

    Aside from the crime against humanity Gestapo tactic that is, where’s the proof that it would even be effective? Most of the highest profile terrorists in recent years were all not only on the FBI’s radar, but had been easily identified as terrorists.

    The solution to this government’s failures in fighting terrorists is not to beat up on its own peaceful citizens.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      These guys admit as much, but claim that the logic is of this approach “is a trap”, and that closing loopholes “may” stop the next attack:

      http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5c6_1466347564

  4. avatar No Soup 4 You says:

    Within hours of the Oklahoma City Ryder truck going off , and early reports of a large muslim population there , the story changed and it was all ….’ Must BAN guns ‘ …. on every channel. Fast and Furious was exposed and did not result in enough crime to generate a call for ” General and Complete Disarmament ” as State Dept. Pub. 7277 says.
    By leaving our BORDERS open and Importing bad actors from overseas , we now have TERRORISM here. But if it is called ‘ gun crime ‘ …. maybe more RIGHTS can be Stolen from the people. The ” No Due Process ” watch lists are in use already , YOU ARE THE NEXT TO BE ADDED.

    http://ctmirror.org/2015/12/11/n-j-already-using-u-s-watch-lists-to-screen-gun-buyers/

    Call Senate 202-225-3121 …… Call NRA-703-2671141. No New Gun Laws > Secure the Border.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      I vaguely remember some bearded hairy dude as a suspect who dissappeared, who would have been a much greater source of interest in this day & age.

  5. avatar Anonymous says:

    Establishing universal background checks and closing this terrorist gun loophole will help keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, the mentally unstable and individuals with ties to terrorism.

    Except the Orlando spree killer passed a background check and wasn’t on the terrorist watchlist. So no, this legislation would have done absolutely nothing to stop the Orlando killer.

    Now you are thinking, let’s ban the AR15 right? Except with a 3 hour response time by law enforcement, the spree shooter could have amassed 49 deaths with a bolt action 22 rifle. So try again.

  6. avatar gs650g says:

    Little Dick Durbin at it again looking for a camera and mic for relevance.

  7. avatar J38 says:

    Thomas is seriously considering retirement. If Clinton is elected and Ginsburg takes her cue it is possible Clinton could nominate three justices in her first year. And if Kennedy, who is 80, decides to retire she could nominate four in her first term. Happy times.

  8. avatar Martin Gomez says:

    The Demunists are pulling out all the stupid to deny Americans their Constitutional rights. Just two weeks ago, they lied and said they didn’t want to take guns, just pass “common sense” new gun bans. Now they are attempting to take Americans’ rights by marrying a secret list the purported shooter wasn’t on to ban guns the shooter didn’t have. Because Democrats.

  9. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    The law abiding gun owner has officially become the US political scape goat to assign blame to when the govt fails to protect it’s citizens.

    This constant attack and threat of infringement on constitutional rights is treason. Period.

    It’s time to clear out all of the treasonous politicians that have broken and continue to break their oath to uphold the US constitution and only then can we have a real talk about what must be done to counter terrorist threats on our soil.

    1. avatar kenneth says:

      Agreed! The first thing one must always do is clean up your own messes. Then after our own yards are clean, perhaps the neighbors could be persuaded to clean theirs as well….

  10. avatar Mark N. says:

    Deadliest in our nation’s history? I guess he forgot about the Civil War and the multiple massacres in Kansas, including that at Lawrence. There, over a four-hour period, Quantrill’s raiders pillaged and set fire to the town and killed much of its adult male population. Quantrill’s men burned to the ground a quarter of the buildings in Lawrence, including all but two businesses. They looted most of the banks and stores and killed between 185 and 200 men and boys. This raid was revenge for numerous attacks, called “jayhawking”, committed by the Red Legs, an unorganized anti-slavery militia (described at the time as little more than a gang of uniformed thugs) who rode around killing anyone suspected of southern sympathies.

  11. avatar Don says:

    How’s that war on drugs coming fellas? And the good patriotic citizens of America for the most part don’t own or want illegal drugs, yet you can’t make a dent in the trade. In fact you’ve enrichened our enemies, empowered our gangs, and brought in thousands of criminal aliens and along with them tens of thousands of illegal guns.

    How’s that war on drugs going then?

    1. avatar kenneth says:

      Well, assuming that; “enrichened our enemies, empowered our gangs, and brought in thousands of criminal aliens and along with them tens of thousands of illegal guns.”, was the plan all along, its going very well. Well enough that it might be almost time to take away the last vistiges of liberty, and institute mass tyranny and what they may deceptively label ‘post birth abortions’, AKA the “Final Solution’, the culling of the population. For our own good, OFC!

    2. avatar PhilWilson says:

      “How’s that war on drugs coming fellas?”

      Just fine, from their prospective. How many salaries are being paid? Gives them an excuse to rob innocent Americans, too, as well as drug dealers. And the gang shootings and misery give politicians something to run on.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        ^ This!

        When government defined a host of narcotics to be illegal, government simply created a whole host of “problems” (drug smuggling and dealing) that require government “solutions”.

        It also gives government leverage to oppress various people that government would not be able to oppress if “illegal” narcotics were no longer contraband.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          Ah yes, a society with no government, no laws brings tranquility and prosperity. Would that it could. However, as society grows, so do the dysfunctional activities that weigh down that society and divert it from achieving a more perfect union. Thus, government must take on the correction of forces that are too general and widespread for individuals to successfully counter.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          2Asux,

          I never said anything about a society without government. Government’s proper role is punishing evil-doers, whether an “evil-doer” is a two-bit thug who just snatched a purse from a little old lady, a rapist, a murderer, or a foreign nation trying to invade.

          In all of those examples, there has to be a VICTIM who suffered harm against their will. A person who wants to consume opium is NOT a victim. They are incredibly stupid/foolish in my eyes. But they are not a victim and government has no legitimate business meddling in such affairs. Even worse, where does it end? If government “should” intervene because opium is bad for us, how about fatty foods? Those are bad for us and the resulting heart disease is the leading cause of death in the U.S. Should government intervene and ban fatty foods? How about foods with sugar and starch? They contribute to obesity and heart disease as well. Should government intervene there as well and ban sugar and starchy foods — for our own good of course? How about if government develops a gruel that is the “perfect” food with no fat, no sugar, and no starch and forces all of us to eat that?

          And look at government intervention (with respect to narcotics) from a purely pragmatic standpoint. Instead of wasting untold trillions of dollars on the utterly and totally failed “war on drugs”, how many more lives would state and federal governments have actually improved if they had instead focused their resources on preventative education and counseling/treatment?

          I will leave you with this. When a very large group of people — 71% of the population no less — conclude that violent males are an existential threat to society, that they would cease being a threat to society if they could simply have sex with any woman they desired on demand, and in response government legalizes on-demand sex with women (and compel women to comply or go to prison for 10 years), is that a righteous action of government? Is that something that we should all support because “the People have spoken” and exercised their will through the political process?

          Answer: NO. Neither are we compelled to go about life unarmed because some group of people demands it and “exercised their will through the political process”.

  12. avatar scooter says:

    Illinois doesn’t have a violence problem, Chicago does… so Illinois has a Chicago problem. My friend who lives in Illinoistan can’t wait to move back to the Show Me state… a lot easier to be armed here!

  13. avatar 2Asux says:

    “Is that a threat or a promise? …. You have been warned.”

    Indeed, multiple times. Barring self-correction by gun owners, society will step-in to protect itself. By law, the Orlando shooter was a good with a gun, until he wasn’t. I know you guys want to want to divert attention by pointing out how there is no effort to disarm bad guys with guns.

    To borrow a phrase from the South, “That dog won’t hunt.” How many of the mass shootings in the last 10 years were committed by a bona fide, already” bad guy” with a gun? How many were committed by a so-called “good guy” with a gun? Answer? All of them were committed by someone who was legally a “good guy” before they snapped (or plotted, then snapped).

    If you refuse common sense, don’t be surprised when it is imposed for your own good.

    1. avatar kenneth says:

      To borrow your own stolen phrase, “That dog won’t hunt”, LaTreene.
      ” divert attention by pointing out how there is no effort to disarm bad guys with guns. “????
      No, we want to DIRECT your attention TOWARDS the FACT that the Federal Government themselves have done, and are doing, everything possible to arm as many “bad guys” as they possibly can! Or is your memory far too short to remember the words “The Fast and Furious”, the so named Federal gun running to gangs scheme?
      You remember, the one that succeeded remarkably? Many, many, murders attributed to those guns, intentionally ran by the Feds to the gangs and drug lords, even of US LEOs!

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Ah yes, Fast And Furious. Started under that great Conservative icon, protector of the faithful, defender of the constitution, second amendment zealot, G. W. Bush.

        Of course that program was doomed to fail. It was, and is, based on a favorite Hollywood gimmick for crime TV and movies.

        But you did commit the standard dodge….you avoided the fact that criminals, gangs, drug dealers and plain low order criminals are not responsible for the mass shootings that everyone wrings their hands over. Those shootings are done by people who were not criminals prior to their rampages.

        To borrow from the pro-gun side, how does disarming “bad guys” stop “good guys” who break, and then go on a killing spree? Apply the solution to the source of the problem….too many guns get in the hands of “good guys” who go bad.

        1. avatar Peaches says:

          Attempts to disarm decent Americans will likely result in a civil war much more vicious than the first one. All those democrats in their big socialist cities will be cut off from their food supply. The heavily armed folks in the barrios and ghettos will end up with most of the available food, while honkee liberals will become dawgfood. 2Asux will probably end up in the belly of a Pitbull.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          We’ve been down this road so many times. Civil war is no longer a threat; the people don’t have the stomach for it, and proper provocations have come and gone without your vaunted rebellion.

          You may want to step back a pace and look at what is happening at large. There are nearly countless ways to make your guns useless without even one of them being wrested from “cold dead hands”.

        3. avatar PhilWilson says:

          “Started under that great Conservative icon, protector of the faithful, defender of the constitution, second amendment zealot, G. W. Bush.”

          This again? OK. One more time. Operation wide receiver began and ended under Bush. It was run with the knowledge and cooperation of the Mexican Gov, so in theory it could have done some good. Fast and Furious began and (as far as we know) ended under Obama, run without the knowledge or cooperation of the Mexican Gov., so it couldn’t possibly have succeeded in it’s nominal purpose. Either shady or gross incompetence. Could be both, but it has to be at least one.

          And George Bush was no conservative. He’s a JFK Democrat.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Operation wide receiver began and ended under Bush. ”

          Yes, indeed. A flawed concept/precept that was adapted by the current regime. The idea failed under Bush (which is why He stopped it). Obama merely took the idea to ridiculous extreme, and failed also. My point was/is Obama did not create Fast and Furious out of thin air. That was all. Both sides can commit the same blunders.

        5. avatar kenneth says:

          Not only can both liberals and conservatives, or left/right, democrat/republican, or any other us/them words chosen to describe the division of people into smaller groups so that they be more easily controlled, commit the same blunders, they can also both be bought and paid for by the exact same multinational corporations, which explains why, despite talking and acting different, they all vote for the same things over and over. It’s Billionaires for Bush and Gore dot com, exactly like in the election of 2000.
          Until you can manage to see around that us/them mental box they have you in, words will continue to be useless. But don’t worry, actions are coming. I can smell it on the wind…

        6. avatar 2Asux says:

          “actions are coming. I can smell it on the wind…”

          I presume you are talking about legal, legitimate political action. I would agree. Orlando will prove to be the catalyst for real change in the minds of the public about the viability of the idea that guns should be sold to any breathing individual who has not committed a crime. It has been a long time coming.

          If you are talking about extra-legal action, I point you to Waco and Ruby Ridge. Two allegedly egregious acts by the government to bring the public to heel. Two acts that would have had the original rebels in this country in the streets, armed and taring and feathering the representatives of the king. America is not that country any longer, because society developed beyond needing to present the illusion of citizen control, by gun if necessary, of the government. We are a nation of laws, not firearms.

    2. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

      Let me know when you are ready to impose that common sense on us gun owners. I hope you are the first person that stacks up on my door. LOL!

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Oh please ! Application of common sense gun regulation does not need to result in a stupid (as in all to expensive) door-to-door raids.

        There are so many ways to make having a gun useless. You underestimate the ability of an enlightened society to put behavior limits in place that do not even risk a forceful confrontation. They are already upon you, in various places, vanguard for a safer society tomorrow (or a few years from now). What you see as outrageous, silly, hopeless, will become the norm until having a gun becomes universally outrageous, silly, useless and criminal.

        1. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Yawn…..leftist diatribe….wake me when it’s over.

        2. avatar gs650g says:

          If your oft repeated phrase “make guns useless” were true then why are you so intent on the bans?
          Troll.

    3. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “If you refuse common sense, don’t be surprised when it is imposed for your own good.”

      That works both ways, you realize, don’t you?

      Think about it….

      1. avatar No Soup 4 You says:

        2 A sx – is happy to remove your 2 A Rights , but would no doubt squeal if we removed , arbitrarily, his Freedom of Speech ………. they never learn.

        1. avatar kenneth says:

          I think you have your mental wires crossed up there. Kenneth is a 2A fundamentalist. He thinks we should all have a 155 long tom in the North 40. Cuz big booms are fun. And Prairie Dogs learn the range limits of your ,22-250…..

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          Actually, old bean, I would respect your right to sponsor and pass a constitutional amendment to restrict first amendment freedoms. If you can succeed at such a huge task, then I deserve what I get. If you (and the theoretical like-minded) can defeat my political attempts to defeat such an amendment, then we who would be speech-restricted have failed to persuade the populace (and political representatives) to squelch such a measure. It is how your constitutional system works. On the other hand…

          If I, and the like-minded, can get a amendment ratified that alters (or removes) your right to have a gun, then you and yours will have failed in the political arena…and you are responsible to accept and respect our political power.

          It is the way the game is played.

        3. avatar kenneth says:

          How strange this is. Your message came to my inbox like this(cut and pasted):
          “Kennith is happy to remove your 2 A Rights , but would no doubt squeal if we removed , arbitrarily, his Freedom of Speech ………. they never learn.”
          WTF?????

      2. avatar 2Asux says:

        “That works both ways, you realize, don’t you?”

        Indeed it does. However….we have every confidence that if “the right people” were put in complete power by your side, they would do nothing to impose much of anything on our side. Too principled they would be. Your side “fights” within a bunch of outdated ideas about gentlemanly behavior. My side fights to win, however it can. Principles can be abandoned for the cause, then re-asserted after victory. Losers are losers, regardless of how high-minded their rhetoric, ideals or principles.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          I see Sam I am’s alter ego is back.

        2. avatar PhilWilson says:

          “My side fights to win, however it can. Principles can be abandoned for the cause, then re-asserted after victory.”

          Stalin. Pol Pot. Castro. Kim. Mugabe. Mao. And so on. The principles your side asserts after victory have filled a hell of a lot of mass graves. That’s not counting generations of poverty and suffering of the vast majority of those who manage to survive.

          But you are correct about the leftist advantage. To destroy and subjugate has always been easier than to build and preserve.

    4. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

      So how mad are you going to be when no new legislation is passed?

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “So how mad are you going to be when no new legislation is passed?”

        Why get mad? Our ideas are relentless, inexorable, inevitable. Your side is short on patience and vision. You want matters settled right here, right now, forever. You want to solve a problem and move onto something else. That is a leverage point we can (and successfully do) exploit to our advantage.

        Getting mad accomplishes nothing. Getting even is helpful, but being patient during the long march will bring victory.

        1. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Actually we are long on patience and ammo. Just say “when”?

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Actually we are long on patience and ammo. Just say “when”?”

          Ah yes, the resort to arms amidst an intellectual exercise. Certainly the sort of appeal that wins new adherents to the cause, eh?

          If you don’t understand the message, don’t understand the conflict, don’t understand what is happening in front of you. Don’t engage the page. Please.

        3. avatar Don says:

          No, like many before you, you don’t understand the conviction and dedication of the silent masses here in the US, nor do you comprehend not only the possibility of civil war, but the inevitability of it should the elected and unelected members of our government continue to commit treason by violating their oath to our constitution and their duty to serve the citizens, not demand fealty and conformance from them. Rave on.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          Oh indeed, I understand the depth of illogic of gun owners; it is fearsome. That is why it is so important to establish reasonable controls on such people.

          It is your right to believe that this nation has your favorite “3%” who will rise up in armed rebellion and restore the government of the founders. History declares forcefully that there was a single second chance, and that failed. After 150 years do you not see that by comparison between that rebellion and the nature of the government today, there is nothing that will ignite another revolt?

          To be completely redundant, your side spent about a week complaining about government overreach and illegal action at Waco and Ruby Ridge, yet nothing happened. According to your side, at Waco a peaceable collection of people were assaulted without cause by government agencies. Many people were killed and injured, buildings burned. And for what federal law violation? Your founders were incensed by a couple of deaths at Lexington and launched a war.

          Today’s “patriots” tolerate a perceived greater insult and injury while standing idly by at Walmart or some such. Your energy is better put to work getting your representatives to do what you elected them to do. On second thought, keep dreaming about revolution, and leave your representatives impotent.

        5. avatar jwm says:

          Except they’re not. A bernie supporter on the dole in England is not much threat to our way of life here.

        6. avatar 2Asux says:

          “A bernie supporter on the dole in England is not much threat to our way of life here.”

          Probably true. But I am not in England; not on the dole (I receive income from four different organizations in the US). To be truthful, my mother would kill me if I was on public assistance.

        7. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Didn’t realize he was a foreigner JWM….thanks. Now I can just sit back and laugh even harder at this fool. His libtard fantasies of civilian disarmament have no impact on any of us.

        8. avatar jwm says:

          How can we believe your statements now when in the recent past you’ve stated that you live in a jurisdiction where sling shots and air guns are treated the same as firearms? You’ve said that firearms can only be used on dedicated ranges and there’s no exception for self defense.

          And you’ve stated in the past that you were retired early from some pilots job and didn’t need money. You were a bruce wayne type(my description, the bruce wayne bit).

          But suddenly you’re needing the money from 4 orgs.

          So, can you be believed in any statements you make? You have no credibility.

        9. avatar 2Asux says:

          Words, m’Lad, words. Everything you noted is not only possible, it is fact. Don’t be restrictive in sussing out the meaning of words.

          It would be easy to presume one can only have a single-dimension life. However consider: living in more than one place, different times of the year; retired from one or more entities; post-retirement employment from more than one source; tele-work; community organizer (best term I can come up with); political activist (maybe repeating myself, here). All in one lifetime.

          BTW, excess income goes to several reputable charities. So add philanthropist to the mix.

        10. avatar 2Asux says:

          Don’t ya just hate it when the victor tells you how you will be beat, and how badly?

          One of the favorite lines from gun owners is, “Don’t brink a knife to a gun fight.” Look at who you have elected for political leaders and representatives. Who do you complain loudest about? Someone carrying full court their ideas and policies through representative government (so-called liberals, leftists, statists). Or the namby-pamby so-called “conservatives” who talk much and do nothing. If you are faced with an opposition attacking all directions at once, do you really expect refusal to resist will result in ultimate victory? Fortunately….we can count on your side to continue on a pacifist course to defeat.

        11. avatar jwm says:

          The world’s most interesting man? Or just another internet troll. You decide gentle readers.

        12. avatar 2Asux says:

          Is your life really that narrow, one-dimensional?

          If you knew the lives I was trying to emulate, would you think them worthy of derision, disbelief?

          Start with Leonardo Da Vinci. At his time he knew everything, literally everything, there was to know about math and science. The world got more complicated, and probably no one after could be so versatile. Perhaps a study of your own Thomas Jefferson would be instructive of how multi-faceted one life can be. There are others.

          To break it down:
          Combat pilot, qualified in handgun and rifle, Public Information Officer, seconded to higher military staff twice, as a civilian managed consumer products fulfillment warehouse operation, licensed estate sales representative, procurement manager for small aircraft repair station, software sales and implementation manager (two companies), career/employment transition consultant, contracts manager for large organization, engaged in senatorial election campaign, published three small articles in trade publications, and two small ventures I couldn’t make a go of. Still on the bucket list: published author in a major trade magazine or work of fiction, learn guitar.

          Is all that really not possible for one person?

          Is any of it important or relevant to discussions of gun policy?

        13. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Good news. Retired….most likely old….won’t live another 20 years.

        14. avatar 2Asux says:

          Have you no knowledge of the number of people who retired young and started entirely new careers and lives? Living another 20 years is actuarially supportable, at the least. Don’t hobble yourself with a belief that one must be old, ancient, decrepit or useless after completing a career.

        15. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          BTW….just purchased a new revolver this weekend. Went old school with a S&W. I think I’ll name it after you.

        16. avatar kenneth says:

          “J” Frame? They are my favorites. Smaller, lighter, more concealable, more reliable, safer, and prettier than semis. I like Ns and Ks too. Even Ls. I love a good wheelgun. And even a lot of bad ones….

        17. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Went old school with a S&W. ”

          How old? In my opinion they stopped making “real” revolvers when they ended production of the1875 Colt SAA.

        18. avatar jwm says:

          Did I hit a nerve, 2asux? Suddenly you want to impress me. Inbred upperclass english twits don’t impress me.

        19. avatar kenneth says:

          How astute of you to notice how he is suddenly so desirous to impress upon you just how important he is. Good comprehension skills. Among others that I have noticed you exhibit previously.
          “8. Invoke authority.
          Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.” -Rule #8 of the 25 rules of disinformation

        20. avatar 2Asux says:

          Most difficult to keep all the strings completely sorted, but one fellow asked how I can trusted because I have alluded to an unconventional career path. Compared to “the most interesting man in the world”, I was; not a favorable comparison, I might add. Thus, a listing of the adventures of life as illustration of how one could be many things along the way. I find it curious that such a course should be considered noteworthy, or an item of even slight interest. So, if you are “not impressed”, I do not take offense. I am not “impressed, either.

          As I asked, what has any of this to do with discussing gun rights matters? Can we get back to it?

        21. avatar 2Asux says:

          Not sure what hitting a nerve has to do with anything (but you didn’t hit a nerve, as you put it).

          When one is on the right side of history (and reduction on unregulated ownership and use of firearms is the right side), one does not suffer sensitive nerves about that position. Insults are one thing (which hasn’t shown its ugly head as of yet), but opposing opinions and ideas are not unexpected, nor are they threatening to the Id.

        22. avatar jwm says:

          But, you’re on the wrong side of history. You’re on the side, like the klan, that would deny civil rights and reduce freedom.

          And your recent statement about working to get Bernie elected shows just how out of touch with reality you are.

          But that’s ok. Keep tilting at those windmills. Nothing will come of it and it’ll keep you off the streets.

        23. avatar 2Asux says:

          Bernie moved Hillary further into the proper position on many issues. Yes, Bernie lost and a loss is a loss. His influence will likely be felt many years to come. One day, people will look at Bernie as a seminal event in political history.

      2. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

        This guy is entertaining. He really believes in himself. *grabs popcorn*

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Mr. Woodcock commented on Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin and State Rep. Robin Kelly: We Won’t Stop Disarming Until You’re Disarmed.

          in response to Mr. Woodcock:

          So how mad are you going to be when no new legislation is passed?

          This guy is entertaining. He really believes in himself. *grabs popcorn*”

          ??????

        2. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Don’t mind me….just feeding the troll.

        3. avatar 2Asux says:

          You may be new here. “Troll” is defined as someone who engages to merely torment, or instigate for amusement, often dropping in a contentious statement, then never returning to engage responders. You will find that I generally engage seriously, and take time to respond to nearly every counter argument or statement. The intent of a person is the hallmark of “Troll”. My intent is to always present my observations, and contribute to the give-and-take of serious ideas.

          But if you presume anyone with a contrary opinion to you or the bulk of TTAG readers is a “Troll”, it is a useful means to avoid tough issues and reinforce the echo chamber. You must understand, however, I take everyone at face value and treat their comments as if they are sincere…until it is obviously not so.

        4. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

          Oh I’m fully aware of the term. I was actually practicing a little trolling on you. That’s the pesky thing about those that think they are bright……take the bait every time. It was fun….thanks!

    5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      2Asux overlooks these FACTS:
      — Political/government “solutions” to spree killers and terrorist attacks don’t actually work.
      — Millions of people see the failure/futility of political/government “solutions” more and more clearly every day.
      — As more and more people see more and more clearly that government/political “solutions” will always fail, more and more people recognize and espouse the solution that actually works: arming themselves.
      — As more and more people feel courage in being armed and feel visceral fear of facing attacks unarmed, more and more people will demand that government NOT interfere with our right to be armed for self-defense.

      Why are we going to win? Because we have both FACTS and EMOTION on our side. Gun grabbers only have emotion. That is why they are going to lose the long game and we are going to win the long game.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        My friend, if you were going to win this argument would have ended in the early 1900s with the first gun control laws. There would be no restrictive legislation from 1968, or 1980s, or 1990s. I think if you count the number of gun control laws enacted, versus those overturned or repealed, you will find advantage gun control.

        To win the gun control argument, society would need to bend hard right, now. That isn’t happening, and the demographics tell us it will not for several generations. That is our rising tide of opposition to free-wheeling gun ownership. The more people we have with a degree of understanding how devastating guns are to a free society, the more support for legislation to restrict the time, place and means that firearms may be deployed across the nation.

        1. avatar kenneth says:

          ” the demographics tell us it will not for several generations. That is our rising tide of opposition to free-wheeling gun ownership.”
          I seem to recall almost those exact same words being said to the Bundy’s at their NV ranch. The day before the Feds tucked their tails between their legs and fled, wasn’t it?

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          Yes, round one was a learning experience. Then there was round two, eh?

        3. avatar Tom in Georgia says:

          I’ve heard it through the grapevine that you are somewhat intelligent, and that might even be true. However, based on your commentary, said intelligence is considerably exceeded by your arrogance bordering on psychopathy. To quote Robert Crain, “you are……deleterious.”

          Now you have a nice day, y’hear?

          Tom

        4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          2Asux,

          Gun control gained ground in most of the United States throughout most of the 20th century because most people had no idea what was happening, had not idea how it would impact them, and had no easy way to organize. Thanks to the Internet, people are much better informed, far better organized, and much more effective in the last 16 years. That is why gun-control has been steadily losing ground in most of the United States in the last 16 years.

          Sure, gun control support has intensified recently in Hawaii, Coastal California, Cook County Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Washington D.C., Metropolitan New York City area, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. Outside of that — the majority of the United States population and land mass — gun control is waning, and quite rapidly in many areas.

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    Chicago’s gangsters are killing each other and that’s supposed to be a bad thing? Not in my book. Let them kill each other. Hell, pay them a bounty if that what it takes.

    More dead gangsters, please. Since they multiply like insects, it’s the only way to diminish the thug birth rate. Dead thugs don’t breed.

  15. avatar Mk10108 says:

    It’s confirmed – elected representatives are clueless and useless, cannot solve a problem. Should collect their coin, go home and plant a garden. Leave problem so loving to citizens in the trench.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      You are just now figuring this out? Where have you been?

  16. avatar Priest of the center mass says:

    Id love to see their investment portfolios to see if they own stock in gun companies.
    I swear it just seems like they just keep busy working on this never ending non issue.
    If they were really concerned with lives saved then they would tackle all the other bigger issues that get people killed on a daily basis.
    Cars….healthcare malpractice…..lead lined aging sewers….so on and so on.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “Id love to see their investment portfolios to see if they own stock in gun companies.”

      That’s fine. The dollar de-values over time.

      Meanwhile, the value of the guns purchased increases wrt to those dollars. I know which side of this investment curve is objectively gaining.

  17. avatar patrick says:

    Just picked up my CCW here in Georgia and looking forward to carrying. Any pointers for first time concealed carriers?

    1. avatar Priest of the center mass says:

      Keep a good lawyer in your pocket and train in tccc, bls and als as much as you shoot.

    2. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

      Yeah-don’t go to Illinois. No reciprosity. DICK and Robin(no Batman) are the firmly entrenched left-wing scum that “represent” me. DICK is the ultimate argument for term limits. Robin is the replacement for convicted felon Jesse Jackson Jr. Due to gerrymandering my congressional district MY vote counts for naught(except in my town). So the Chiraq ethic extends far south to Kankakee…

    3. avatar MLee says:

      Yeah, the gun, holster and caliber are all secondary considerations. Of primary consideration is education on applicable laws concerning use of lethal force and then practice practice practice. Carry your firearm until it feels so normal that not having it feels uncomfortable and “abby normal”

      Now for my personal opinion part; take open carry and flush it. Keep your gun concealed. This is from 38 years of carrying concealed.

    4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Click on the “Guns For Beginners” tab/link above and scroll through the article for pearls of wisdom on concealed carry. I am nearly certain that their are articles about newbies to concealed carry. And pay particular attention to the suggestions in the comments below those articles.

  18. avatar jwm says:

    Who says they’re not coming for our guns?

    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      “Who says they’re not coming for our guns?”

      Not me.

      1. avatar Mr. Woodcock says:

        You can’t leave England…..no fly list and all.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          England, bah. Too ruddy damp and nasty for me.

  19. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Chicago’s issues seem to be largely in the fact that crime is a “race issue” rather than a “crime issue” now. Instead of locking up the parasites of society we empty the jails then complain there is crime. How stupid and backwards that is. I would love to do an FOIA request and determine how many of the people in Chicago who were shot or convicted of shooting someone were on parole/probation/bail at the time. I wouldn’t be surprised if a huge portion were supposed to be in jail at that particular moment.

  20. avatar Robert w. says:

    Loophole:

    I don’t remember the last time I heard that word used correctly. When will politicians start consulting 5th graders when they write public announcements, because they seem to have a better understanding of English than them?

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      For anti-gunners, a “loophole” is any element of a law that permits, or does not prohibit, whatever or whichever activity of the public that the anti-gunners do not want to be permitted. From the anti-gun perspective, “loophole” is an accurate description of the condition they abhor.

    2. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

      DICK is not the brightest bulb in the senate-just the longest serving(well he’s getting there). I’ve heard rumblings of this inept fascist running for governor…that would SUX.

  21. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “Tool-up against the bad guys and stop the threat. This is my gay club. This is my front porch. Those are my kids. Mess with them and you answer to me. And I mean, right now.”

    This is the only language that violent criminals understand and, more importantly, actually respect.

  22. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Here is some common sense for you folks in the gun control crowd: You think the Australians were so “brave and wonderful” for deciding to infringe on the rights of their citizens, yet you fail to understand that only about 30 percent of the forbidden firearms were turned in (per government estimate) there are estimates that the original number of firearms in the country was far higher. You pat yourselves on the back for every small bit of freedom you manage to destroy here in the US, and you still fail to understand. When so few Australians, who have no absolute expectation of their own right to keep and bear arms, are willing to turn in their arms as demanded, how do you expect Americans to be willing to turn in their personal arms?

    The gun control territories of New York and Connecticut implemented “Assault Weapon” registration recently and what was the response from the gun owners in those areas? Repudiation! Few owners of those guns in New York turned in paperwork and in Connecticut the response was barely 50,000 rifles against an official state reported estimate of over 370,000 rifles present in the state.

    Registration and confiscation? Americans will not submit!

    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      You underestimate, at your peril, the power of an idea whose time has come. The combination of a determined society and a determined government are almost irrestible. Registration and confiscation are not the only means to neutralize gun ownership.

      I would love to see the second amendment interpreted to apply only to firearm ownership as a means to support local, state and federal forces in efforts to maintain law and order, repel foreign invaders, or put down insurrections. Any use of firearms for any other purpose would be cause for arrest, trial and sentencing to a mandatory 15 year prison term. And a host of other measures making firearms so burdensome that people would just discontinue use and maintenance.

      Perfection of outcome is not required, only sufficient reduction in use so as to dry-up the number of sources for new guns, reduce the number of guns newly available, reduce the frequency of possession such that we see a significant reduction in violence by gun in society. Many lives saved is better than “even just one”.

      1. avatar Don says:

        Like drugs, all you would do is raise the price and thus recruit more powerful and more evil players to the trade. Logic.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          “…all you would do is raise the price and thus recruit more powerful and more evil players to the trade.”

          Did you intend to describe all those law-abiding gun owners as more powerful and evil as they rebuff the laws and become non law-abiding? If changing laws turns law-abiding citizens into evil, then I submit that was their nature all along. Best to rid them of firearms quickly.

      2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

        The statists in power, Democrat and Republican alike vastly underestimate the power of those they think they rule. The people of this country are more and more disposed to apply Irish Democracy to the issues in front of them. The statists banned alcohol and suppliers from rum runners like Joe Kennedy to Appalachian distillers in my home state went into business to fill in the gap for a profit.

        When it comes to making firearms, do you think CNC equipment and 3D printers are at all difficult to obtain or use? Do you think steel for milling or stamping difficult to obtain? Here is one more for you: it is much easier to build a machine gun than a semi-automatic firearm and both are easier to make than a revolver or any of a thousand different small to medium sized tools common to modern life.

        The technology to create these things is wide spread and common. As has been said before, you can’t stop the signal!

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          Yes, and I can make zip guns till my eyes fall out. But you pull back the cover on the illusion that gun owners are law-abiding “good guys”. If, through proper legislative action, guns should be banned entirely and a program of confiscation (not necessary, but for this line of discussion it suits) were implemented, all those law-abiding gun owners would reveal their true selves as not so law-abiding after all. All those las-abiding good guys would trample the political process setup under the constitution and build illegal guns. A good guy with a gun is actually a bad guy waiting for the right event to act out.

        2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

          So if in the majority passed a law saying you had to turn in your Jewish neighbors you would be fine with that. I guess morality plays no part in your world view; pardon me of I place a higher priority on morality than the law or a higher priority on the Constitution than laws that violate it.

        3. avatar kenneth says:

          You’ve put your finger right on it. For a Statist, morality has no existence. They worship the state(thus the name) so that makes the state GOD! Whatever they say, is all that there is. Thus whatever new law comes out, you obey it or you are evil by definition, for they define evil as; not following the dictates of their one true god(the state).
          If tomorrow, the state says that you must kill all people with blue eyes, then killing blue eyed people becomes the ‘good’ thing to do, and to not kill such becomes ‘evil’.
          It becomes quite clear why they can be so cozy with Jihidi’s and ISIS doesn’t it? They are natural allies, believing in exactly the same things.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          Here’s a “statist” moral code for you: Causing harm to any individual by another is immoral, subject to societal sanctions.

        5. avatar 2Asux says:

          Morality is subject to the ballot box. Morality is what a society determines it to be. Ask your elder family members about how many elements of personal liberty today were moral outrages in their day, and before. Blacks have equal rights because society (via the Supreme Court) decided it was now immoral to separate the races. Asians are no longer exploited because society decided it was immoral to treat them as we had in the 1800s. And on it goes. So far, this nation still holds that it is immoral to single-out one or another group of humans for extermination. We are not talking about exterminating gun owners. We are talking about protecting society at large from 1/3 of the population who believe there are no rights superior to holding a gun.

          Spock had the most succinct statement on the proper relation of people to one another. And that statement reflects a universal moral.

      3. avatar kenneth says:

        “You underestimate, at your peril, the power of an idea whose time has come.”
        Here is one thing you have absolutely correct. There is an idea around whose time has finally arrived. It is called “liberty”, and it is, indeed, very powerful. Your side peaked about 15 years back, and the pendulum has already started to swing away from socialist collective drones, and back towards individual liberty. It cannot now be stopped, no matter how hard you try, and it will continue to accelerate back to the center, in the manner of all pendulums everywhere.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          Great response. Let’s keep this one saved someplace and check back after November 2016, and then 2018 (off-year elections for House and Senate). Then let’s compare notes and see how it goes.

        2. avatar kenneth says:

          Oh, I don’t think it will take waiting until 2018. Trouble is, I predict that the statists will not get out of the way of the pendulum, and the weight of its inevitability will crush them instead. So there will be no one left on that side to compare notes with. Its kind of like betting that I will die by a certain future date. If I live past it I lose, but if I die before then I win, but cannot collect my winnings. Its called “futility”. 🙂

        3. avatar 2Asux says:

          My insurance carrier is convinced I will be here until at least 2018. But November 2016 is just round the corner. Looking forward to it.

        4. avatar kenneth says:

          I’m sure you are. Hillary has already been crowned the queen in Dresden. That is the plan, anyway. We’ll just have to wait and see if that works out any better for you than Bunkerville and Sandy Hook did. Don’t bother pointing out that Bundy is under arrest now, and on and on. Emotions make humans do stupid and crazy things, but the ranch still isn’t yours(or perhaps I should say China’s through Harry Reid’s son), so it’s still a fail.

        5. avatar 2Asux says:

          Let’s be completely callous for a minute. Previous mass shootings didn’t lodge in the politically effective cortex of the progressive movement. Orlando is outstandingly different in the only way that really matters. The LGBT community has been historically suppressed in a way different from other special groups. The killing of so many gays resonates with a substantial number of advocacy groups that were largely absent, or at least disorganized, concerning other mass shootings. Orlando rises above them all (right or wrong) because of the gay factor. Haven’t anything to really point to, but expect us to ride to victory on Orlando,

          As for Bundy (or Waco or Ruby Ridge) the importance is not about capturing or confiscating territory. The issue is that there was no mass armed uprising for or about any of them. So if we look at Waco, Ruby Ridge, Bundy 1 and Bundy 2, the government won 3 out of 4. If you look at whether there is sentiment in the populace for toppling “a tyrannical government”, then the government wins them all.

          Look around you. Add up all the alleged rogue government actions over the last 25 years. Yet there has been no popular uprising. What will it take? I submit that the only viable (nay, possible) path for the remnant of “rugged individualism” (which few today ever experienced) is political only. Count the numbers, progressivism stretches as far as the eye can see. The reactionaries represent a smaller segment of the voting population (gross numbers don’t really matter, only voters). Look even at the electoral college (the popular vote really is only to entertain the populace). Hillary only needs about 40 votes more than she currently represents through democrat controlled states (somewhere around 240 electors). On your best day, with Reagan once again on the ballot, your side faces utter defeat.

          But, we shall see.

        6. avatar kenneth says:

          But all of that is attempting to predict the future based upon the past. The idea is always that whatever the current trends are, that will continue, because that is what seems to happen. Trends DO continue… right up until they don’t. But looking to the past, it is impossible to predict the trend changing, because it hasn’t happened yet. And yet trends always change, just as pendulums always swing back and forth. It is simply not possible for a pendulum to keep swinging one way only and never go back. It is not possible for a wave to crest forever, and never ebb. Or for the tide come in and never go out.
          And as for the LBGT connection, the pink pistols are spiking in membership, just in case you haven’t seen any news stories on them lately.
          http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/orlando-nightclub-massacre/lgbt-gun-rights-group-sees-membership-spike-after-orlando-shooting-n594701
          Just more evidence that the pendulum is swinging against you. Even the gays are abandoning your sinking ship.

        7. avatar jwm says:

          You will ride to defeat on the coattails of Orlando. Orlando proves, not that it needed proving, that the .gov cannot effectively protect the individual. barry and hillary will rant and rave but the people they are trying to decieve are seeing the truth. Their self protection is on the individual.

          If Sandy Hook did not bring new federal legislation Orlando will not, either. It just exposes the hypocrasiy of barry trying his best to avoid placing blame where it belongs, on the religion of peace and hillary’s worn out chant against guns.

          In the meantime record numbers of guns are being sold all across the spectrum of American citizens that have recognised that they are responsible for their own safety.

          More states have gone constitutional carry since Sandy Hook and it’s my opinion that the entire country will be constitutional carry within 10 years.

  23. avatar Cliff H says:

    “The horrific mass shooting in Orlando was the deadliest in our nation’s history. In response, this week Democrats in both the House and the Senate said ENOUGH, and demanded action to stem the rising tide of gun violence in our country,”

    Sand Creek Massacre – late 19th century attack on a peaceful Cheyenne Indian village:

    (from Wikipedia) In testimony before a Congressional committee investigating the massacre, Chivington claimed that as many as 500–600 Indian warriors were killed.[30] Historian Alan Brinkley wrote that 133 Indians were killed, 105 of whom were women and children.[31] White eye-witness John S. Smith reported that 70–80 Indians were killed, including 20–30 warriors,[2] which agrees with Brinkley’s figure as to the number of men killed. George Bent, the son of the American William Bent and a Cheyenne mother, who was in the village when the attack came and was wounded by the soldiers, gave two different accounts of the natives’ loss. On March 15, 1889, he wrote to Samuel F. Tappan that 137 people were killed: 28 men and 109 women and children.[32] However, on April 30, 1913, when he was very old, he wrote that “about 53 men” and “110 women and children” were killed and many people wounded.[33] Bent’s first figures are in close accord with those of Brinkley and agree with Smith as to the number of men who were killed.

    I guess because it was government agents who committed this atrocity it doesn’t count?

  24. avatar Cadeyrn says:

    Once again, the politicians who could commit resources to pursuing violent felons, drug dealers and gang members who are actually committing the firearms crimes refuse to do the hard thing and jail the criminals. Instead, they want to distract from their failures and shortcomings while still pretending to do something meaningful, so they go after law abiding citizens.

    It’s kind of like sending the police to give traffic tickets to soccer moms and sports car dads out in the suburbs. It’s nice and safe, generates revenue with relatively little squawking, and doesn’t get the police unions all agitated.

    Vote them out. All of them. Send them packing unless they’re going to do their job. Enforce the existing laws before you start claiming you need new ones.

  25. avatar Free says:

    All the banter with the regular attention-seeking hater…wow. The lefts ideas are stale and bankrupt. Admitting that principles can and will be discarded to achieve a goal for being a “means to an end,” here’s a hint, you don’t have principles.
    Coming to a website to antagonize the proponents of armed legal defense by claiming you and the Left will subjugate non-believers to your will, is sounding alot like the evil we hate in the Middle East.

    1. avatar Free says:

      Progress of an idea born after revolution from an elitist group like 2Asux:

      http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/default/files/images/Rtc.gif

    2. avatar 2Asux says:

      I believe you unintentionally responded to the wrong person, but I get your drift.

      Wasn’t it your Vince Lombardi who said, “Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.” ??

      Before you can effect political change you must first win. In a battle for the political future, that which isn’t illegal is allowed. The god old “South” of the Confederacy died on a principal because they were not prepared to fight a war of attrition. But they died and lost honorably. THEY LOST, get it?

      If coming onto “enemy” (used loosely) grounds to debate the issue is antagonizing, I submit the problem is yours, not mine. If you want an echo chamber, appeal to the TTAG staff to ban my participation; I would honor such decision, it is their blog, afterall.

      1. avatar kenneth says:

        “If you want an echo chamber, appeal to the TTAG staff to ban my participation”
        That doesn’t happen here. You must be thinking of MDA or CSGV. Those are the “echo chambers”. This site likes spirited debate, esp when it can be kept free of insults and ad-hominem attacks. Doesn’t the length of this debate and the professionalism/ lack of insults(and thx for that, BTW) make that obvious?

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          What TTAG does or doesn’t do is not really relevant. My message is/was that wishing opposing viewpoints should not be presented (allowed?) here is indicative of desire for an echo chamber. If pro-gun ideas cannot stand opposition and friction, what are those ideas worth?

        2. avatar kenneth says:

          But they are standing up to, and loving, the opposition and friction RIGHT NOW. Have you no eyes, that you cannot see? Have you no ears, that you are so unable to hear?

        3. avatar 2Asux says:

          I see a greatly surprised and demoralized gun lover club after November. I hear the baseless bravado of the last gaspers.

  26. avatar Libertarian says:

    http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/illinois.pdf

    In Illinois is no legal public carry, near 100% covered as an off place for lawfull citizens and any violation is an misdaemor ……..

  27. avatar Steve O says:

    Come and take them, Dick.

  28. avatar GR81 says:

    Oh, little Dick. You’re not getting dick from us! Pound sand!

  29. avatar JEFF HOSER says:

    As “Winnie” so poignantly stated; ” an appeaser is one who feeds the crocodiles hoping they will eat them last” ! Very apropos of events of this past week ! I strongly suspect we’re facing a constitutional crisis of major proportions engineered by various monetary cabals. The results of November will reveal their intent. But what happens then? Enacting firearms seizure laws and accomplishing them are two widely disparate objectives. Objectives – and the resultant resistance – the “elites” are bound to use to propagandize to their advantage in the “blue enclaves”, and the MSM.

  30. avatar JDS says:

    The big lie starts with the first sentence out of Dicks mouth. The lie how the Orlando shooting is the largest mass shooting of civilians in US history. Its not, by far it’s not. The largest slaughter of innocent men women and children took place December 29,1890.
    When 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms for their own safety and protection. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children.

    Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

    The Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

    Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

    At this site http://www.woundedkneemuseum.org/ you can hear oral testimony of the massacre, by the last known survivor.
    So listen up Dick and listen up Kelly, I won’t surrender my weapons, period. Government has a bad track record of killing unarmed citizens and I will never surrender my safety to the likes of you.

  31. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    I would take exception to the statement:
    ” I don’t suppose gun-carrying porch sitters are going to stop stray gangland gunfire.”

    If gang-bangers knew that they would receive return fire from multiple compass points every time they opened fire, they might get involved in a community basketball league instead.
    If drive-by shooters knew that they would end up in a smoking, burned up hulk of metal that was once their car, they might spend the evening polishing their Honda instead.
    Might sound harsh but you’ll be saving the lives of many potential future gangsta’s….

  32. avatar Parnell says:

    “This is a starting point.” Well, at least Dick Dufus is being “honest” about it. first this, then the Federal Registry of Gun Owners, then overturning Heller & McDonald, moving to repeal the 2nd Amendment and if successful; confiscation. We have to stop this now!

  33. avatar pg2 says:

    Surprise, surprise….another politician crying for mandatory vaccines, aka loss of individual right to make informed medical decisions, is crying for more gun control. Seems to be a pattern.

  34. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    I would be delighted if Senator Dick would focus on disarming the people who shoot first vs the people who #shootback.

    If you can’t tell the difference, you are “Buckley stupid.”

    (I am inspired to coin that new term by Senator Dick’s ‘Kinsley Gaffe’ – a politician accidentally admitting the truth. “We won’t stop until you are all disarmed.” – paraphrasing the inescapable meaning of his word fog. Got it. Nice of him to admit it.

    Of course, “Nobody is coming for your guns.” I wish I could recall where I heard that… If only I could ask my (ex-)doctor.)

  35. avatar Joe R. says:

    IL fix your cr_p. This is all on you. One bag.

  36. avatar Dave says:

    So we’re going to call it a “terrorist gun loophole” now? Because if you’re not for universal background checks you hate America & want the terrorists to win! You don’t want the terrorists to win, do you?

  37. avatar LHW says:

    Just some politicians revealing their true colors. Move along, nothing to see here.

  38. avatar Groutboy says:

    We already know now that People within the different political parties are orchestrating “Mass Civil Disarmament programs, as well as curtailing other constitutional amendments—such as, due process, innocent till proven guilty, fair and speed trails in a court of law by your peers, US citizens being able to confront their accusers, deprivation of liberties, etc…” The list goes on….The question is what are We going to do about !!!

  39. avatar Ryan says:

    I live in WI…I work in IL (Rockford to top it off).
    Every single day I put up with the fact that though I can carry and have no criminal record my best shot at defending my self for the majority of my day 5 days a week is a pocket knife or throwing something heavy-ish…I hate this state. Yet no one in charge seems to notice that the worst state/city (Chicago) for gun crimes is the harshest on us law abiding individuals.

    when I read this all I see is “you have no rights, you have no say.”
    http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/illinois.pdf

    Here’s to hoping D. Trump and the REP government forces National Reciprocity.
    *Side note, any So-WI employers looking for experienced IT employee?
    reach me at ryajor89@gmail.com

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email