“We must speak out in a strong, collective voice and ask elected officials to pass legislation that requires gun sellers to do background checks and close gun show loopholes,” she said. “I’m not against the second amendment, but based on what happened in Tucson and at Virginia Tech, it is clear that current gun regulations are far too lax.” – Susan Reis, National Council of Jewish Women’s Stop Gun Violence Committee Chairwoman at clevelandjewsishnews.com

Recommended For You

28 Responses to Quote of the Day: Underregulated Edition

  1. “I believe in the second amendment but….”

    “I beieve in hunting and target shooting but…”

    But my ass, anyone who starts a sentence with those words is just saying they believe in freedom but…they don’t.

    • As Dr. Phil has said, “but means ignore everything before ‘but’ and let me tell you how I really feel.”

      Now you too can quote Dr. Phil!

      • So he can what? Get paid hundreds of millions of dollars by housewives who are upset with their failed lives and want to blame their husbands, so he’ll bash men to get their approval (and money)?

  2. The “gun show loophole” is a myth, at least in my state. Here in Vermont, which has the least amount of gun control laws in the country, everyone is still required to undergo an instant background check before buying any weapon at a gun show. The whole “gun show loophole” thing is just another lame argument to try and justify gun control……Molon Labe!!!!!

    • That can only be true if your state outlaws private sales at gun shows. If you don’t believe me, go ask the ATF if private citizens are allowed access to the NICS system.

      • The way the laws are written in PA, all pistols must be transferred by an FFL (or a county sheriff, although I never seen one do it), which runs checks through both NICS and PICS.

        Long guns, on the other hand, can be legally sold without a background check, however it’s generally unwise to do so to someone you don’t know, and as such many sellers insist on doing a papered transfer through an FFL.

        IIRC, NFA items can also be sold without FFL’s, as the buyer needs to do all kinds of background checking with the BATFE(ARBF) before taking possession anyway.

  3. Didn’t both shooters from Virginia and Tucson go through background checks? What does that have to do with “relaxed gun laws” have to do with background checks? Both of these guys went through background checks, right?

      • You’re the one ignoring facts. One fact is that a psychotic maniac or a recently paroled armed robber can buy a gun privately with no background check.

        Thanks to you and guys like you and the lobbying organizations you take your cues from, that’s the way it is.

        • And if we make a law against it that means all the crazies and gang bangers will stop doing it out of concern for the law, right? I’ve seen a lot of grabbers get refuted by the simple statement that criminals do not and will not obey laws, and that these rules only hurt people who are already not going to go on rampages. Not once have I seen a grabber even bother trying to respond to this, they either disappear or fall silent… except on other threads of course.

  4. “We must speak out in a strong,and collective voice to ask our elected officials to pass legislation that requires private car sellers run vehicle history reports on any buyer of their vehicles and close ‘DUI loopholes’.

    I’m not against people driving to work so they can feed their families,but based on the fatal accidents that happen every day in America due to alcohol it is clear automotive laws are far too lax.”

    • She is in fact accurate.The ‘Chair’ is not against the 2nd Amendment alone;she in fact probably opposes the entire document.

  5. Another dope on a rope has been heard from. Do you folks still wonder why I’m so dismissive and contemptuous of these a$$h0les? And no, there’s no way she can be convinced of the truth once she’s made up (what passes as) her mind.

  6. Al Sharpton’s 1st Amendment rights have killed more people than my 2nd Amendment rights. Try closing that “loophole.”

    But, won’t find anyone going after any other Amendment. Why? Because those are the “real” Amendments, that annoying 2nd Amendment doesn’t mean anything.

  7. Once again, I am dumbfounded that a Jewish organization neglects the historical facts about what often happens to a disarmed populace, especially a minority populace.

    Other than my immediate family, all of my relatives are vehemently anti-gun. While all of my kids (now adults) grew up with guns in the house and learned gun safety and how to shoot when they were little, they, along with me, are the political black sheep of the extended family.

    I lost aunts and uncles to the camps and mass graves of Minsk (my mother’s family), and the Ukraine (my dad’s family).

    I am ostracised by my NJ, NY, PA, IL, MI, and MA relatives because I do not support their political candidates and do not support their political causes. Because of their partisan, social, and anti-gun political activities, I refuse to support almost all of the local and national Jewish organizations. I prefer to contribute to JPFO rather than B’nai Brith, or any of the Reform Jewish organizations.

    I will not belong to a synagogue that is a member of the URJ (formerly known as the UAHC), because of its “sociopolitical” platform that includes long time and virulent anti-gun platforms, including these:

    http://ccarnet.org/rabbis-speak/resolutions/all/gun-control-1989/
    http://ccarnet.org/rabbis-speak/resolutions/all/gun-control-1975/
    http://ccarnet.org/rabbis-speak/resolutions/all/gun-control-lobbying-1987/
    http://ccarnet.org/rabbis-speak/resolutions/all/gun-violence-ending/

    In the past, at Jewish Chautauqua type events, I defended the 2nd Amendment and gun rights and while a few agreed with me, the majority did not, with most being completely unwilling to even hear a different viewpoint.

    My kids were brought up in a Jewish household, with respect for others, and a strong sense of independence and self-reliance. To me, that is far more important that participating in group religious activities that are contrary to our personal and family values.

    The mainstream Jewish community does NOT speak for me.

    • Hey-don’t sweat it.The only relatives I bother with are one of my cousins who spent 25 years in the Marine Corps and shot on a pistol team for them decades ago and his sister.
      The rest of them can go piss up a rope as far as I’m concerned.
      I’m Jewish by background,if not by belief,and my wife isn’t,so actually neither are my son and daughter,but both own firearms.
      I spent my life in the military and law enforcement and have always had guns handy.
      Anything calling itself a “Jewish women’s group”can reliably be assumed to consist of scumbag liberal screech owls.
      I had a Jewish english professor in college in the early 60’s who went on to head the California state gun rights group-I forget the exact name-she was also a reserve deputy sheriff and a pilot-her name was Dr.M.P.Cosman and she passed away some years ago.
      There was a Jewish woman who recently served as President of the NRA.Amazing-and certainly suppressed by the media.

  8. The absolute, complete idiocy of the “Progressive” Jewish community never fails to astound me.
    Always has, apparently always will……

  9. she said. “I’m not against the second amendment, but based on what happened in Tucson and at Virginia Tech, it is clear that current gun regulations are far too lax.”
    In other words we need to ban all guns from private ownership.

  10. Did y’all notice the comments on that site were entirely unsupportive of her viewpoint? There is hope! Or should tha be Hatikvah?)

  11. So if we base our laws on what happened in VT and Arizona it’s clear we should throw people in jail that use their political influence to hide their son’s police record and arrest those who don’t report people being treated for mental illness to the proper authorities. Beyond the simple fact they were bat crazy it’s clear to most people that those tragedies could not have been prevented unless we strip everyone of their right to self defense by firearm. And in the VT case gun bans on campus clearly allowed him to kill as many as possible. Jared is lucky to be alive since at least one bystander was armed and could have dropped him. Too bad he didn’t, would have saved the taxpayers millions in long term expenses.
    Despite the tragic nature of those events it’s not permissible to disarm us all while not addressing the criminals. The left is looking for the one big event that will usher in confiscation, like England and OZ, and they will milk every tragedy for all it’s worth. What scumbags.

  12. “…requires gun sellers to do background checks and close gun show loopholes,”
    “…based on what happened in Tucson and at Virginia Tech, it is clear that current gun regulations are far too lax.”

    Didn’t both shooters go through dealers and pass background checks? IIRC the VT shooter even obeyed the “one gun a month” law and waited two months for his guns.
    Soooo… what exactly is she suggesting would’ve been different if there wasn’t a “gun show loophole”?

Leave a Reply

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