beto robert francis o'rourke lies background checks
(AP Photo/David J. Phillip)
Previous Post
Next Post

This is what happens when you rely on “research” by Everytown for Gun Safety for your campaign’s anti-gun talking points.

(Robert Francis) O’Rourke repeated a variation of a claim we have fact-checked before, saying that states that have adopted universal background checks for gun purchases “have seen a reduction in gun violence of up to 50 percent.” Recent academic research does not support that.

O’Rourke: We know that in this country, those states that have adopted universal background checks and close every loophole — the Charleston loophole, the boyfriend loophole, the gun show loophole — and make sure that everyone who purchases a firearm goes through a background check, those states have seen a reduction in gun violence of up to 50 percent.

O’Rourke is a proponent of universal background checks, which would cover private sales by unlicensed individuals, including some sales at gun shows and over the internet. But he has repeatedly cited this misleading success rate, despite recent academic research that suggests it is wildly inflated. …

In 2018, the RAND Corporation released several reports as part of its Gun Policy in Americainitiative, including one on the “Effects of Background Checks on Violent Crime.” The review identified eight studies since 2003 that examined the relationship between background checks and violent crime, and that met its research criteria. The report concluded: “Evidence that background checks may reduce violent crime and total homicides is limited, and studies provide moderate evidence that dealer background checks reduce firearm homicides. Evidence of the effect of private-seller background checks on firearm homicides is inconclusive.”

– D’Angelo Gore, Lori Robertson, Eugene Kiely and Robert Farley in O’Rourke Twists Facts at Town Hall

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. The Beta Boy is out of ideas, out of touch and his campaign is nearly out of time. Unfortunately he just won’t get out of Texas

  2. Let’s see, in 2016 Trump beat Cruz by a wide margin.

    In 2018, Cruz beat O’Rourke without really trying.

    So, in 2020, O’Rourke is obviously the man to finally defeat Trump.

  3. Can’t stop the signal. The “fact” is already out there, and repeated endlessly. The fact check gets no widespread attention. And politicians know this.

    Have first-hand experience providing an anti-gun liberal actual, real, verifiable, facts from a source he trusts, except when it comes to guns, then his trusted source is wrong – government agency buckled to NRA pressure.

    • Sam I Am,

      Your friend buckled because he is not really operating on evidence, facts, and logic. Instead, he is operating on emotion, fantasy, and virtue (as he defines it).

      People like your friend mention “facts” for one reason only: to try and win your support. You cannot reason with such a person any more than you can reason with a rapist, armed robber, or murderer. They simply want what they want: facts do not matter, standards do not matter, right and wrong do not matter.

      • Yes, but you can shoot a rapist, armed robber, or murderer to dissuade them from their course of action!

      • “They simply want what they want: facts do not matter, right and wrong do not matter.”

        Correct. When confronted about being emotionally-driven, my brother-in-law demands that with thousands of people being killed every week by gun owners, emotion is the only way to deal with such slaughter.

        • Well, he is not TOO far off. The number is somewhere in the vicinity of 615 per week–if but only if you include all the suicides. Murders are about 240 per week, roughly 192 of which are gang violence related.

        • “Well, he is not TOO far off.”

          Thousands every week vs. 855 does seem different from “…not too far off.”

          I think BIL bought completely in on Virginia Govenor Terry McAuliffe’s claim that 93 million people are killed by gunfire every day.

        • “Well he is not TOO far off”? first of all 615 is , oh let’s see, (THOUSANDS minus 615 carry the 9 divide by 350 million factor in mental issues) yeah just as I suspected 615 comes up THOUSANDS short of THOUSANDS… So remove suicides (those folks will unfortunately find another way if a gun is not available) and gang violence which leaves 48 gun related deaths weekly? That’s seven a day or one every three hours and forty two minutes (+or-) so how many of those were (1) armed robberies/home invasions (2) crimes of passion (guy caught his ol’ lady with his best friend (3) accidental and the BIG one (4) A GOOD GUY with a gun stops a BAD GUY with a gun and of all 615 how many were actually LEGAL gun owners? Because that is the implication of that “study” a bunch of legitimate gun owners are out roaming the streets 24 hours a day looking for someone to kill.. Sounds WAY far off to me, but then I’m one of THEM…

        • “Because that is the implication of that “study” a bunch of legitimate gun owners are out roaming the streets 24 hours a day looking for someone to kill.. ”

          You just nailed it ! It is what we are up against. People with guns kill people. People with guns will kill people. You never know who has a gun, and is going to shoot up the crowd you are in. If guns are taken away from all the legitimate gun owners, they can’t use their guns to kill people in crowds.

  4. Beta is dead in the water…no one wants to see him get his teeth cleaned. What a MAROON😋😊😏

  5. Same crap different day.. Say something untrue, repeat-repeat-repeat-repeat-repeat…. eventually it is an accepted “talking point” gets picked up by the MSM more repeat—————————-etc…. and eventually becomes an absolute unassailable fact and can no longer be questioned by those NRA sellouts, so how dare the gun nuts accuse him of lying, if enough people believe it it must be true…

    • MaddMaxx,

      … if enough people believe it it must be true …

      I have mentioned several times that gun-grabbers and their ilk operate on emotion, fantasy, and virtue (as they see it).

      What I have not mentioned is another critical insight into gun-grabbers and their ilk: they have a desperate and pathological need to be a member of the group. They are quite willing to suspend reality in order to maintain the group’s collective identity and their standing in that group.

      Thus, gun grabbers and their ilk are incredibly reluctant to challenge their official talking points because:
      (1) It would weaken the group’s “moral” authority.
      (2) It would reduce the cohesiveness of the group.
      — and most importantly —
      (3) It put’s that individual’s membership in the group at risk.

      • Yup…exactly what he just said!

        A side note: O’Rourke es un pinche gabacho, mentiroso y hijo de la chingada. Y tambien creo que Beto is un baboso y pinche mamon!

      • Really seriously, no matter how many polls agree, or how many folks agree on something, the truth does not change. If 99.999% of people asked agree that 2+2=5, it still is not true.

        • “If 99.999% of people asked agree that 2+2=5, it still is not true.”

          Then you have no idea how things work today.

        • Guessin’ that you were educated under Common Core principles…”as long as you (kinda) understand the idea then the actual answer is irrelevant”…just because you feelz that something is correct, even when presented with definitive proof to the contrary, does NOT make it so.

          Your political ideologues often act out the quotes below:

          “It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”

          “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”

          Congratulations, you are using tactics embodied by the most despicable group of humans aspiring to world supremacy within the past two centuries. Both of these quotes are attributed to Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister of Germany from the mid-1930’s to 1945.

        • “…just because you feelz that something is correct, even when presented with definitive proof to the contrary, does NOT make it so.”

          Au contraire. When what you call facts offend me (and other enlightened, modern, sophisticated persons), I can have (and do) legislation passed to back me up. What you call “facts” are mostly made-up stuff to defend male, white supremacy, and repress and suppress people trying to find their way. And if I/we can’t get legislation, we can look to the courts to overturn all this illegitimate dead white guy society that refuses to admit that reality is what people perceive it to be, and as free agents, independent, with human, natural and civil rights, we can decide to be whatever we want. Already in England and Canada, if you refuse to accept that people can change gender like changing sox, failure to use the preferred-at-the-moment noun/pronoun for someone can land you in jail. Howz that for “fact”?

          Things you say/write, like your comment here, are offensive, bigoted, selfish, harmful, ignorant and plain being a meany. As a free individual, any restrictions your “facts” place on my gender, or lifestyle, or beliefs is an attack on my personal freedom. If I can make 2+2 equal 5 work for me, what’s it to you?

          And I have, unlike you, actual proof of my claims: the girls at Hooters believe that I am 26, rich, 6’2″, handsome, witty and a stud of epic proportions. The more money I spread around, the more the girls are convinced of my claims. Proof positive that “facts” are situational, flexible, and irrelevant.

          So, there….

        • “Thank you for your response…best laugh of the week!”

          Happy to be here, grateful for the opportunity, proud to serve !

  6. Beto’s campaign is going nowhere fast. Even democrats that were initially wooed by him realize he brings nothing to the table.

  7. “Figures often beguile me,
    particularly when I have the
    arranging of them myself; in
    which case the remark
    attributed to Disraeli would
    often apply with justice and
    force: “There are three kinds of
    lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”

    Mark Twain

  8. Beto is the human personification of Austin.
    1. Undeserved reputation for coolness
    2. Only left wing by comparison to the rest of Texas
    3. Still think punk and grunge are even a little bit relevant
    4. White as hell, but pretends to be Hispanic
    Can’t stand either.

    • I have no idea where your creds come from, but the bride and I arrived in Austin in 1977, and were still living in a motel 10 days later when we decided that Austin was home forever. At that point we had experience with VA, CA, HI, NM, FL, AL, TX, and several foreign countries. Now, 40 years later, we’ve run past essentially every other state (minimal exposure to AK, but we like warm) and quite a few more foreign countries, and we still find the Austin area superior to any other on the planet from a variety of perspectives. So, asshole, what are your credentials for your brainless criticism?

  9. The problem is these Pendejo Authoritarians et al. Codify their lies into anti gun laws.

    We may win some pro 2A battles but we’re losing the war of leftist aggression.

  10. Lies upon lies, backed up a corrupt media, propaganda from gray suited thug government types, an education system awash in a lefty progressive brain washing agenda. Now legal weed in many states to keep the brains from thinking. AMERICA, is truly doomed.

    • The people who don’t think, won’t think, regardless of weed, or most other substances.

      There’s a world full of high functioning alcoholics and potheads out there. Don’t get me wrong, they might function even better without the additives, but blaming the drugs is a fool’s errand.

      • Since the VA all but outlawed Oxycodone I have turned to “‘weed” for pain relief…. I don’t smoke til I’m stupid high but I do hit it several times a day otherwise I would be sentenced to a recliner for the rest of my life.. I no longer drink and having used that along with various illegal substances for years to relieve pain I just don’t want to fall back in that hole. I am a lot clearer with a little weed than I ever was taking a 30mg Oxycodone every 4 hours and my mind is my own….

  11. The left and “Universal Background Checks” reminds me of Dusty Springfield’s ‘Wishin and A Hopin”. But never gonna work. A thought, exchange universal background checks for a National Carry? Just to see if these SOBs and “not trying to take your guns” is for real.

  12. You think they realize how infantile that laundry list of “loopholes” sounds? Even retards have to realize the only reason people use that sort of language to disguise what they are talking about.

    • Anyone ever found one o those gun show loopholes I keep hearing about? Been to a couple hundred gun shows , nobody seems to know where to find them!🤨

      • they exist…but mostly for convenience…and are rarely..if ever…used by criminals…much ado about nothing….

  13. There is no such thing as a gun show loop hole. This is a lie that is continuously repeated by anti gun people for years now. No one can go to a gun show and purchase a gun without a state or federal background check. This is a lie and fear mongering at it’s worst.

    • “There is no such thing as a gun show loop hole. ”

      Actually, there is. It is one of many “loopholes” that aggravate the authoritarian/statist. To understand “loopholes”, you must understand it as the complainers do: something they want that extends their power over others, but the law intentionally permits a particular activity. “Normal” people look at loopholes as missing elements that, regardless of the intent of the law, permit easy misues/abuse. For authoritarians, laws that specifically permit something they don’t like are, in and of themselves, loopholes.

      A fun loophole in background checks is the provision of the law that puts limits on how long the background check can take, before rendering an approval/disapproval. This loophole allows persons to legally obtain a firearm before that person is exhaustively investigated by a dozen or more federal agencies. Such loophole would be closed if the law demanded each person undergo a six-month background check using every federal database, and commercial background check tools.

      The gun show loophole is the wording in the law that permits individuals to make private sales/transfers to other persons, without a formal background check. Here we have an example of a law permitting activity the authoritarian/statist doesn’t like. Rather than being a “common sense” feature of the law, such permission is a dangerous loophole through which obviously suspicious persons (they want a gun after all) can buy guns without being proven eligible. The so-called gun show loophole even exists far away from gun shows.

      • I have sold several firearms at gun shows, no BC involved. Just as it would have been if I sold it to the guy next door. And why not? When is one of these “background check” idiots going to show us WTF DIFFERENCE background checks have made in the past 30 years, because the answer is “none”. Nobody ever expected them to make a difference, which was intentional, to force UNIVERSAL background checks on us, so that the requisite registry could then allow confiscation (the holy grail), since UBC would ALSO have absolutely zero effect on actual crime. Oh, confiscation would not affect crime, either, but you will never convince the grabbers of that!

        I mean, think about it. Some fruitcake shoots up the place, then it turns out he passed all the background check silliness, the suggested answer is STILL universal background checks, like people are actually that stupid.

        • Correct! UBC was indeed created to appear to the uninformed or just plain stupid. Again; if a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes the truth, or something along those lines.

        • “Some fruitcake shoots up the place, then it turns out he passed all the background check silliness, the suggested answer is STILL universal background checks,…”

          Failure of something only indicates lack of effort, commitment, money, smart people, or something.

  14. I’ve never been quite sure what the “gun show loophole” is since those who parrot the evil of it seldom explain what they mean by the term. All they know is that it exists at every gun show and it is bad, bad, bad – resulting in untold numbers of deaths annually.

    • If I sell my neighbor a gun, no BC is required. If we drive down to the gun show for me to sell him the gun without a BC, then we have participated in the “gun show loophole”, at least according to the “gun control assholes”. So they would like to pass UBC, so that when I sell my neighbor a firearm without a BC, I will have broken a completely unenforceable law. Because I still will not require a BC for a private sale, if you want to support me for the rest of my life in Club Fed, drive yourself crazy. I doubt that will happen, we can’t even stop the invasion on our border.

  15. There are people that make there living buying guns without paperwork at gun shows and through private sales and yes they buy them off the internet without paperwork by arraigning face to face sales and in some cases they get them sent right through the mail. These people then run these second hand guns to other States with tough laws and also large cities that have strict gun control laws and sell them to fences that know the local community and in turn sell them to drug Ganges, it happens every day and millions of dollars in blood money exchange hands.

    Without uniform Federal Gun Control Laws State and City gun control laws are ineffective.

    The U.S. does not require a mental health examination either in order to purchase a firearm. Beto has said nothing about this very necessary requirement.

    I think even a Neanderthal could see that any crook, nut case or terrorist can and do buy all the weapons and firepower they need 24 hours around the clock and 365 days a year. The result is that legitimate law abiding gun owners take the heat for all the crime and murder committed by the criminals and nut cases and by opposing universal background checks, mental health checks and safe storage laws they only make certain that they will eventually lose all of their gun rights from the almost daily new gun ban laws that seem to be passed in a never ending avalanche almost all of which are upheld by the corrupt courts.

    Its much easier for Political hacks to just ban guns then to pass controversial laws that cost them and the tax payers money but in turn would not ban guns. This is not as dramatic or attention getting as banning guns when they are running for office.

    The real truth is that the Brady Bill that has been in place for decades and has not taken any guns at any time from anyone but it has shown how many people who should not own guns attempt to buy them and if second hand guns were also vetted only a dim whit would claim it would not stop thousands of people who should not have guns from getting them.

    Lets face facts the majority of guns used in crime are not stolen guns but guns bought through friends or through second hand sales.

    I have personally seen second hand guns used in crime happen too many times to even remember the count. Police tracings of guns used in crime have proven this.

    Even the amount of stolen guns could be cut way down if the U.S. had safe storage laws as well. Although no law is completely 100 per cent effective does that mean we should sit back and do nothing which only insures that the public outcry against gun ownership will grow stronger because of the crime committed with guns and this in turn will speed up passage of more and more panic draconian measures that will inevitably be passed.

    The majority of U.S. citizens do not own guns anymore and two recent studies prove it and suburban expansion (blight) has turned thousands of former rural towns into modern suburbia. In my own life all of the places I used to hunt have either been posted or been turned into housing developments or shopping centers. It was predicted 50 some years ago their would be a new Megalopolis that would stretch all along the entire Eastern Coast of the U.S. That has now come to pass. With few places left to hunt anymore the gun owning public has shrunk to a mere pittance of its former early 1900’s size where just about every other home had a shotgun or a .22 rifle leaning up in a corner of the house.

    Public opinion strongly influences law makers and the courts back up law makers so both can hang on to their power over the people 2A or no 2A. That is reality like it or not. Lets face facts , when Republican Governors recently started passing anti-gun laws its a wake up call to the fact that we are not doing enough to stop criminals and crazies from getting guns in the U.S. and committing mass murders in our schools now on a weekly basis.

    Europeans are asking themselves “Has the U.S. gone completely insane”? Sadly the answer is in the affirmative.

    The old adage “A Conservative gun owner is always his own worst enemy” proves only all too true which in turn guarantees what he does not want to happen will happen and all to often already has happened.

    Beto did not achieve what he has achieved by being stupid. He knows he is on the right side of Public Opinion and he is exploiting this to the max in his campaign. Liberals , Independents and even Moderate Conservatives because they all have children in school too are agreeing with him and its no accident even some Republican Governors are lining up behind him because their passage of anti-gun laws prove it.

    And honestly ask yourself this question “If I had just recently been released from prison or an insane asylum how long would it take me to find and buy a second hand gun?

    The honest answer is it would take you probably less than 48 hours to find a second hand gun because the U.S. does not have a Federal mandatory background check on second hand guns and it only takes a hand full of cash under the barroom table or over the gun show table to get one. And I have been attending gun shows for years and I am not blind to second hand sales and I have also seen many a gun bought under the bar room table and it was and still is all legal in many places.

    I once was told by an inmate at an insane asylum that when it came to the gun problem in the U.S. he was less insane than our law makers are. I had to admit to him he was right. He may have been insane but unlike our lawmakers he had not lost touch with reality when disusing the gun problem.

    I live in a country run by the Insane and for the Insane.

    Yes the U.S certainly is the best place to live in if you are a criminal or a nut case and the weekly mass murder in schools certainly proves it. It is as if gun owners have a subconscious desire to lose all of their guns and rights because they simply refuse to do anything when the house (Country) they are living in is burning down and crashing down right on top of their heads.

    Darwinism guarantees that the gun owner will lose all his rights in the end because if he had been a little higher on the evolutionary scale he would have won to keep his rights by promoting laws that would have made it far, far more difficult for banned people to get guns rather than throwing the dice and gambling all or nothing and inevitably losing it all, but when did the average gambler or gun owner ever have any brains.

    • Sorry Dude but your argument is wrong. Just because the government does not control one hundred percent of gun transfers is not the problem. If all of your “loopholes” were closed I can still acquire a gun on the black market.
      Go to a gun show and see if you can purchase a gun without being checked out by the gov. How many private sellers are there in comparison to commercial business people? Most private sellers are friends/ aquaintances, not people in gun shows.
      Gun storage laws might slow down a thief but safes can, and are, broken into. No guarantee that the gun will not be stolen.
      “Lets face facts the majority of guns used in crime are not stolen guns but guns bought through friends or through second hand sales.” Sorry to disillusion you, but this statement is false. Perhaps you should educate yourself by reading statistics published by the FBI, or studies conducted by researchers who interviewed people in prison about where they acquired the guns.
      All these easy solutions that you are proposing are not going to work! The way that they are implemented will not be like how they are written. People who are paranoid of firearms do not want any citizen go have a gun for any reason and will twist any law in their desire to remain “safe”.

      • And you lied to yourself when you did not answer my question, “How quick could you personally get a gun if you just got out of prison or were released from a mental health center”? The honest answer which you refuse to admit to yourself, not us, is that you could get one in less than 48 hours and it would not have to be stolen as a matter of fact it would be quicker and easier to get a legal second hand gun than a stolen one

        • Vlad! You are correct! Feel better now? However, just EXACTLY as you describe, it would be exactly the same regardless of what stupid laws you may wish to pass! EXACTLY the same. Criminals will always be able to obtain guns, and you cannot stop them by getting into stupid arguments online, if you could we would not have drugs available on every streetcorner in America after 50 years of the “war on drugs”. The way to defend yourself is buy a gun, learn to use it, and carry it everywhere, all day every day.

        • OH! And in answer to your amazingly childish question, if I were being released from prison, I’d imagine I could arrange for the guy who was picking me up to hand me a loaded gun as I climbed into the car, before I closed the door. Like, 30 seconds. It would be illegal, of course, but we are assuming I am a CRIMINAL, why would any law you wish to pass slow me down in the slightest? Local law, state law, federal law, or an 11th Commandment, none of that will have any effect on crime. Get over yourself.

  16. Universal background checks would have had no effect upon most of the mass murders that have been in the news the past few years. The firearms were purchased legally by people that would easily have passed background checks. Easily. You bring emotion into the argument when you bring up what Europe thinks. That Europe doesn’t think too well is evidenced by how some of their leaders (Chamberlain?) that they had chosen reacted to clear facts.

    • You conveniently ignored the metal health checks. No mention of those.

      And in Britain last year their gun control worked splendidly as the terrorists tried to buy shotguns and were denied. When they then used knives instead to attack people in a bar they got the shit beat out of them with broken beer bottles and chairs. Now lets see you lie your way out of this one especially the mental health checks that would have stopped the majority of attacks on schools because they would not have bought the legal weapons you spoke about and the balance would not have happened either if the parents would have been required to lock guns up in a safe.

      By the way Police reports prove that guns travel from states with weak gun control laws to states with stick gun control laws. Again Police reports prove it.

      “What people don’t really appreciate is that the standards for gun ownership are so that you can be a legal gun owner but not so much law abiding,” Webster said.

      The last time the government tracked this kind of data was in 2004 when the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics surveyed inmates in federal and state prisons. Part of the survey asked inmates who had a gun during their crime where they originally got it.

      About 48 percent of state prison inmates surveyed said they got the gun they SECOND HAND USED from a family member, friend, gun store, pawn shop, flea market, or gun show. Most states only require a background check if the purchase happens at a gun store, according to the Giffords Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

      Again you argue we should do nothing since any law past is not 100 per cent effective. Its about as asinine as saying why out law the private ownership and possession of dirty Atomic bombs or poison gas either. Or why make silencer owners go through a very strict background check since they can be made in a basement. Again a crock of shit because the silencer law has proven very effect with its strict background check after decades on the books. Those few times silencers were indeed made and sold on the black market resulted in the mfg. quickly being located and jailed.

      • I know I’m most likely wasting my time with this one since you are obviously extremely knowledgeable and seem to have access to all the police reports, facts and figures so you probably won’t even bother with this but I am curious… Since you chose to praise the success of licensing of sound suppressors maybe you could enlighten me as to how many crimes, mass shootings suicides or accidental shootings involve weapons equipped with legally acquired suppressors as opposed to those homemade/black market jobs…

        • quote” Oh, and the silencer law you admire so much has been effective, you say? Like, what has that effect been?

          Perhaps it is my fault for not educating you on the 6th grade level. Just imagine no silencer law and what would happen. Any bored yah hoo that was looking to blow a little cash on something that he did not need (ear muffs have been around for centuries and a lot cheaper) buys a silencer over the counter and when Mr. Yahoo got bored and needed some money to get drunk on a Saturday night he sells said silencer to Joe Caponie the street punk second hand with no background check. Joe Caponie then murders his next door neighbor and since no one hears the gun go off Joe laughs all the way to the cocaine dealer who asks Joe where he got his silencer. The Cocaine dealer then tells Joe that if he goes out and buys a dozen of them legally that he will pay him double the amount of money. Now we have 12 silencers that will also be used in crime and all untraceable because Joe will say , hey I did nothing illegal so sue me. The Cocaine dealer then says , hey I did nothing illegal when I sold them and since I did it at a gun show how in the hell would I remember who I sold them to. And I did nothing illegal so go ahead and sue me ha, ha. I cannot make it any more simple than this. So ends our parable as to why we passed a silencer vetting law decades ago. Its precisely why we do not have millions Joe Caponie’s either killing people with them or selling them second hand with no paper work because when its registered in your name you know damn well it better not end up in a crime and if you sell it you know damn well you better transfer it out of your name legally. I cannot make things any more simple for you to prove to you why we have a silencer law in the first place. As Sherlock Holmes would say to you “Elementary my Dear Maxx, elementary”.

        • First of all that stupid “quote” did not come from me.. And since you chose not to respond to my actual question I’ll help you out, He answer is none.. And FYI while the govt. goes to such lengths to “control” suppressors why do they not control the one thing required to allow a suppressor to function on a pistol, the extended threaded barrel, I can buy them by the box full and in fact do own one for every one of my pistols and I use them to mount my custom made (by me) aluminum cased suppressors… I have also built suppressors for all of my AR’s.. Now I’ve really grown weary of your condescending “smarter than you” long winded nonsensical bullshit.. So take your Progressive Democratic Socialist Liberal Euro gun control crap to someone who really gives a flying fuck what you think.. You are so caught up in your own stupidity that you can’t even realize when you are being played.. So now you can spend the rest of the day misquoting me and expounding on your incredible depth of knowledge which in this case WILL be a waste of time because I have no further need of you and your moronic ideology…. Maybe you should take time off and clean your mommy’s basement I’m sure she would appreciate it and it would be far more productive than trying to annoy the grownups with your amusing (though remarkably tiring) ignorance… Good Day…..

        • Your lengthy ramblings are vaguely entertaining…kind of like watching a horror movie in slow motion…you know how it’s going to end…but, you keep watching anyway.

        • quote:Maybe you should take time off and clean your mommy’s basement I’m sure she would appreciate it and it would be far more productive than trying to annoy the grownups with your amusing (though remarkably tiring) ignorance———-quote

          Remember what I said about gun owners on the evolutionary scale. They always go off their rocker when they have to face the truth. Now look who is ranting.

          And by the way Mr. Expert you ignorance is appalling as to why they did not ban threaded barrels. In target shooting tuners sometimes do have threads on them as well as flash hiders and recoil reducers that are also used on guns. None of which are a danger to the public. I would educated yourself more in regards to the overall big picture of firearms usage before you let the public know how little you are versed in the various other aspects of the shooting sports. And I might add a threaded barrel is of no danger if one does not break the law and use an illegal silencer. Your rant is non-sequitur. Touche as the French say and scorch out as the back woodsman of your neighbor hood would say. Of course many of them I have met have guns with flash hiders, tuners and recoil reducers so I do not have to explain things to them.

      • “And in Britain last year their gun control worked splendidly…”
        I’m glad to hear that there was not one case of violent crime last year in GB. Wait, that’s not what that draconian gun control achieved?
        Well at least no one got killed there, right? Splendid indeed! …No?
        Then its great that at no one was shot in GB last year. Not the case either?
        Oh, some two bit wannabe terrorists couldn’t get shotguns on the legal market and were too dumb to know how to drive a truck or make a bomb. Gun control for the win!

        Why should we care what some disarmed guy on the other side of the Atlantic thinks about us again?

        • quote “Why should we care what some disarmed guy on the other side of the Atlantic thinks about us again?”

          We should if we hand any brains which the U.S. obviously does not. Last year there were only 2 foreign European School shootings, 1 in one country and the other in another country and all the remaining countries HAD ZERO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS. Now any person with a mediocre amount of grey matter between their ears would see the dim light bulb go on in their cranium and ask himself an honest question “WHAT IN THE HELL ARE THEY DOING RIGHT AND WHAT ARE WE DOING WRONG SINCE WE HAD 288 SCHOOL SHOOTINGS TO THEIR 2 SHOOTINGS IN ALL OF EUROPE.

        • To quote Representative Joe Wilson…”you lie”.

          24 school shooting incidents in 2018 in the USA…definitely NOT the 288 school shootings you claim…do you always exaggerate everything by 1200%?

        • To Old Guy in Montana. quote:24 school shooting incidents in 2018 in the USA…definitely NOT the 288 school shootings you claim…do you always exaggerate everything by 1200%?—————quote

          Sorry I do not get my info from Fox News or Rush Limbhead but from Accredited News Programs. Ever hear of MSNBC News. Obviously not. And yes we did indeed have 288 school shootings since 2009 as compared to Europe that had only 2. I was in error when I said last year. But my point is still 100 per cent valid i.e. What are they doing right and what are we doing wrong?

        • Alright Vlad Boy you got me, I had every intention of just letting you rant unchecked til you got tired and went away, but you are such a blatant liar and obvious Kool Aid server I had to go one more round, so here goes…
          (You said) “Sorry I do not get my info from Fox News or Rush Limbhead but from Accredited News Programs. Ever hear of MSNBC News. Obviously not. And yes we did indeed have 288 school shootings since 2009”
          The information you posted is laid out word for word in a quote from CNN (actually almost worse than MSNBC) on Google Search and your numbers sound suspiciously like the ones from “Everytown” anyway I took the time to wade through the bullshit (took about four minutes) and found two LIBERAL sources that even your dumbass should respect that refutes all of your alleged facts about school shootings.. this is just a cut and paste of part of the articles but they do go into much greater depth (which I’m sure you’ll really hate).. Are you Michael Bloomberg or his boyfriend or something? Anyway, enjoy or don’t, I’ve really got better things to do than call out your idiocy all day…..

          NEW YORK TIMES (The Liberal Newspaper of Record) Says:
          A Half-Century of School Shootings Like
          Columbine, Sandy Hook and Parkland
          By WEIYI CAI and JUGAL K. PATEL MAY 11, 2019
          A shooting at a school in Highlands Ranch, Colo., on Tuesday in which one student was killed and eight others were injured swiftly drew comparisons to the 1999 attack on nearby Columbine High School and the dozens of shootings like it in the years since.
          The attack was the fourth such school shooting in the Denver area and at least the 111TH IN THE COUNTRY SINCE 1970, (emphasis mine) according to a New York Times analysis — the latest in a decades-long series of violent episodes that have shocked the nation and traumatized generations of students.
          (That’s an AVERAGE of 2.2 per year over the past 50 YEARS, sounds a lot like your EURO numbers, yes?)

          Leah Libresco at the Washington Post — hardly an organ of the NRA — concluded that gun control measures are of extremely limited value: …my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence… I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths… By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. What Libresco did conclude, was that a host of societal issues are driving much of what we hear about in terms of so-called gun violence. Mental illness, suicide, gang violence, and domestic violence are all important factors that drive gun violence. The problem, Libresco admits, is that simply prohibiting certain types of guns doesn’t really address these issues.
          Accepting the “Crisis” Narrative
          In the wake of last month’s Florida shooting, many opponents of gun control made the mistake of simply accepting the claim that school shootings are getting worse, and are more deadly overall.
          According to Fox’s (not FOX NEWS) research, though, this is simply not the case. And we also certainly know that homicides overall are way down from where they were in the good ol’ days of my youth. These apparent facts, of course, don’t stop even rightwing professional Cassandras like Rod Dreher from authoring articles like this one called “Underestimating American Collapse” which uses school shootings as evidence that American civilization is basically on the brink of collapse:

          Okay VLAD: I understand you will need to come back with other mostly unrelated bullshit to try to prove your ignorance on all things guns but when you start referencing CNN and MSNBC (thank GOD you didn’t use ABC) then your credibility, such as it was, is pretty much shot too hell…

        • I know but IT (attempt at gender sensitivity) just makes it too easy and then IT responds with such idiotic bullshit, just too amusing and too easy to expose to pass up…

        • It really doesn’t matter, when you bring a knife to a gunfight you’re going to lose..

        • I peruse pretty much all of the bureaus, agencies and orgs that purport to report the news. Then I apply semantic analysis to filter through that org’s particular bias to obtain a well-rounded view of any particular event. AP, FOX, CNN, etc…even MSNBC all fall within the criteria of a, ostensibly, news gathering / dissemination service.

          You wrote: “I stated that yes all of the State Laws are ineffective precisely because they are State laws and not one unified Federal Law.”

          Apparently, you are unaware of or choose to ignore the construction of the United States (note: the name gives it away). The United States is NOT a single entity controlled by one overarching Federal service as you so desire…it is 50 unique States amalgamated by a few common causes (the Constitution). Outside of these defined commonalities, the States are free to pursue their own interests for that State and it’s inhabitants.

          You seem to believe that the imposition of additional Federal level laws will automagically stop a certain behavior where thousands of existing laws somehow fail to achieve your desired outcome…that desire is unsupported by reality.

        • Yes most us (those with a “real” education) call it a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC and it is not a DEMOCRACY as all Socialists are taught…

        • Yes Sir.

          As the good Dr. Franklin is quoted as saying… “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

          France loved the US Constitution and the Republic idea so much that they copied it for their model of governance after their Revolution…unfortunately, they are losing the political war of competing ideologies and are going full-tilt Socialism thereby illustrating yet another of Dr. Franklin’s quotes…“When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.”

        • “The United States is NOT a single entity…”

          You made an interesting statement. Have a look at the way you wrote the first four words. Prior to the second Civil War, the reference to the nation was, “The United States are…”. Note that “United States” is not a singular subject (“States” is plural form). Thus, “are” is appropriate as a verb; “is” is not.

          This conversion of “United States” from plural to singular is an important and telling event. The mis-match between subject and verb is a clear statement that the central committee is sovereign, supreme, and the states (note the small “s”) are subordinate. Given the history, one can understand the confusion rampant today about dual jurisdictions: federal laws should reign supreme over state laws. A uniformity of laws across the nation is then not an illogical proposition.

        • I wondered what time your alarm clock was set for. You only prove my point…thank you for your incessant need to be the grammar n*zi. Unfortunately for your political viewpoint the United States remain a collection of separate entities bound by a limited common interest. All your tantrums, misdirection and blatant lies have not changed that.

          Have a wonderfully Conservative day!


        • You gotta learn to read more slowly, old timer.

          My point was/is that grammar is very important in understanding the state of the union today. (only in America can the f-word have six million three hundred thousand different meanings, including being an entire sentence or paragraph).

          The founders established a union of sovereign States, with the power to delegate certain permissions to the central government. The union was the agent, dependent, subject of the individual States. An important distinction that disappeared in 1868.

          With the inversion of the relationship, characterized by the change from “are” to “is”, the supremacy of the union/national government began to take hold. Words have meanings, even in a language as sloppy as American English.

          Once people are comfortable with the inversion of power in the nation (or completely oblivious of it), conclusions that all laws should be federal laws, with states repealing all of their individual laws, are not surprising. But such conclusions are inherently dangerous to the republic as founded.

          To follow proper syntax (grammar), the individual states are, that is are, independent, separate and superior to the appointed agent. It would be silly to construct that last statement as “…the individual states is…independent”. Using “are” retains the proper relationship between and among the States (little “s” since 1868, and “is”) and the central government. We should be constantly shoving it in the face of the federal government that States are not vassals, but lords.

        • Thank you for your concern regarding my age..however, my reading comprehension remains as acute as ever.

          Do you ever re-read your posts? You are no Churchill, Douglass, Lincoln, MLK Jr., Einstein or Ben Franklin…IMHO, you come across as massively pompous mixed with a sizeable percentage of arrogance and condescension.

          Enjoy your evening.


        • “Do you ever re-read your posts?”

          Yes. And I try to keep them focused on ideas and principals (unless I am playing with someone’s posting by employing sarcasm and ridicule). I realize there are commenters here who do not like to move out of the echo chamber, who just want to bitch and moan in short, simple sentences, and reduce complex matters to sloganeering. Generally, I try once or twice to move those persons beyond schoolyard name-calling, and onto a more serious interchange (and I often fail). If attempting to educate, up the quality of debate, and illuminate situations with more than comic book utterances is perceived as arrogance, then one always has access to the magic button.

      • So, after writing a really silly book-length novel explaining to us yokels that all of the 22,000 gun control laws currently on the books are COMPLETELY ineffective, useless actually, did you just forget to include why we should pass even more?

        Oh, and the silencer law you admire so much has been effective, you say? Like, what has that effect been? Lots of people with hearing loss? Effective at what, exactly?

        • quote: So, after writing a really silly book-length novel explaining to us yokels that all of the 22,000 gun control laws currently on the books are COMPLETELY ineffective, useless actually, did you just forget to include why we should pass even more?

          I suggest you return to school and take a remedial reading class in reading comprehension. I stated that yes all of the State Laws are ineffective precisely because they are State laws and not one unified Federal Law. Go back and re-read my post as to why this is so.

  17. 33,000 gun related deaths each year does not even make the CDC top 12 beat out by liver disease at number 12 (38,170) and Septicemia aka blood poisoning (38,940)

    • 33,000 gun deaths is a misleading number, that figure includes suicides, theres roughly 44,000 suicides each year and less than half (around 19,000 involves a firearm, the FBI reports there was 17,413 murders in 2017, the vast majority was in States and city’s with strict gun controls

      • Please forgive me for not being absolutely specific.. I pretty much felt that the implication that the number included ALL deaths by gun was a given since it was being compared to ALL deaths from liver disease etc. I will keep that in mind the next time I use someone elses work to make a point even though when I first read the study it was quite obvious to me that it meant ALL gun deaths including suicides, drive bys, accidental shootings, mass murders, home invasions, Cop shootings and pretty much anything and everything to do with deaths by gunshot since the purpose was to lay out the top 12 causes of DEATH in the U.S. but I do appreciate your diligence and your thoughtfulness in taking the time to point out my error, thank you, thank you, thank you.

        • “I pretty much felt that the implication that the number included ALL deaths by gun was a given since it was being compared to ALL deaths from liver disease etc.”

          Your understanding of the comparison elements is correct. Making the distinction between suicide and homicide is intended to demonstrate that as far as public safety (i.e. being damaged at someone else’s hand) is concerned, deaths related to gun fire are fewer than the CDC (and other) statistics. Using the full 33,000, the result is (if the arithmetic is correct) 0.000103 of the population die from gunshot. Using figures discounting suicide, the number is even smaller. Point to be taken is the risk of being shot and killed by another person is “noise”, much less noise than about 100 other causes of death. If you isolate “mass shootings”, the stat is remarkably lower.

          In essence, guns and deaths related to death are not a crisis, or a national health problem. Thus, the fear of guns is completely and unequivocally one of unfounded emotion (the idea that “if it saves just one” can be applied to any activity where death or grievous bodily injury is possible.

          To focus on one cause of death, as if the complete disappearance of guns would result in a statistically significant reduction in deaths, is beyond irrational. One might as well hide under the covers and refuse to bear any risk at all.

      • I know but if IT wants to pass off MSNBC/CNN “facts” as gospel I figure he needs to know when they are breaking “NEWS”…..

    • Please do not insult our intelligence with your link to the Far Right Wing Fake news site that is really laughable. In actuality the only doctoring of news video was done recently by a republican group attacking Nancy Pelosi that made her appear as if she was slurring her words. The original video was played right along with the fake one by MSNBC News, where were you hiding when all this was being broadcast in the last few days? Please come out of the Fox News Cave and remove your blinders and ear plugs. This fake Republican news group that doctored the original video was immediately banned from Facebook as well they should be banned. They were not as professional as their friends in the Russian KGB that helped throw our election to Fake 45.

      And besides your links are not on the topic we were discussing. So here is the same program right back at you.

      If you tried to save face by attempting to make yourself look knowledgeable you failed miserably as any educated person laughs at such Far Right Wing Fake News sites. Its easy to see how Hitler and Trump were so easily able to fool uneducated people. Same right wing hate propaganda just a more modern version of asshole Adolf. Its no accident Trump kept a copy of Mein Kampf by his bedside and that came right from his wife.

      To bad you do not watch accredited news media. Last week MSNBC had a whole hour on how Trump swindled innocent people out of their life long savings with his fake condo projects in Toronto and the U.S. So far no Fox News propaganda even trying to refute it because its a losing project when you try and claim the truth is fake after so many witnesses told their stories on camera complete with the original Trump paperwork to prove it and won in court against Trump. Even Trump when brought into court claimed it was not his fault because the people did not read the infinitesimal fine print that said he was only renting his name. What a crook when his advertisements lied about every facet and aspect of the investment condo projects not to mention his fake university rip off.

      By the way Trump lost all his Condo lawsuits including his university law suit so what does that tell you when he loses in court. Now who do you believe the court findings or Trumps latest bullshit complete with doctored Nancy Pelosi videos. Of course you will say the U.S. Court findings and rulings are all a left wing conspiracy because your living God Trump says its so. So sad your other God Adolf is not here to see Herr Drumpf carrying out his evil plans. (Sarcasm)

      As you can see your diversionary tactic to avoid the original subject being discussed was a disaster. You bit off more than you could chew. Copying Trump diversionary tactics only impress or are believed by the uneducated. You can only cover up or avoid the truth for a limited amount of time. The truth always comes back to bit you in the ass and there was plenty of documented truth on MSNBC this week. Court cases proved it.

      • Blah, bah! What in God’s name does all this B.S. have to do with “Beto” being an uninformed clown trying to keep me from buying another gun?🤡

      • I am offended and mortified by your blatant use of the words “Far Right”. Your tone is hurtful…insensitive to others who may not share your profound beliefs and is decidedly hateful towards people that you do not even know. You are attempting to bully and marginalize people who are reading this site for entertainment or for educational purposes. There should be a Law against mean people like you on the Interwebz.

        • Yeah if It wasn’t such a rich source of amusement I would be offended as well, but it takes so little effort to set this clown off on another tirade that it’s just too much to pass up.. And the “far right” site that is referenced is just a vehicle to deliver a factual account about another “fake news” story perpetrated on MSNBC by one of their star news readers, complete with video and delivered in her own words before a national audience. The relevance is that this clown held up MSNBC as a credible source for false information that IT had posted earlier and I had already debunked with two extremely Liberal sources which IT chose to either ignore or at least not comment on.. Whoever suggested that IT must get paid by the word is apparently spot on cause that clown has written a novel on this subject alone and still has not made a valid sensible point since IT started…

        • Agreed!

          A reader can either get angry with trolls and give them free rent in their heads or we can play “Bait the Troll”…I choose to play the latter.

          Just like a large-mouth bass Lefties cannot resist the siren call of the Right lure…

          Thank you for your well-constructed responses to Lenin’s “useful idiots” who post here…they are often informative and most always entertaining.

          Beautiful week shaping up in N.W. Montana…might have to go rafting this coming weekend…Life is Good!

        • Glad to help and to keep the clown entertaining.. Montana is probably pretty nice by now, getting hot in Fl pretty soon the Harley will have stay in the garage during the day and we will once again become creatures of the night, enjoy….

        • TDY to the Keys during the Mariel Boatlift. Took kids to see the rat in white gloves a couple of times a decade later…Florida is pretty, but, waay too hot and humid for this mountain hillbilly (never could figure out how local folks found their way around without a nearby mountain as a reference point – pre-GPS days). Our shoulder seasons (Spring and Fall) are outstanding…best weather / fewest tourists.

          Panhead, shovelhead or evo? Our riding window is only 4 – 5 months a year…on your next ride think of your disadvantaged [sic] northern neighbors.

        • 64 Iron Head Sportster in a stretched hardtail Paughco frame, 95 Bad Boy (Soft tail Springer) 08 Ultra Classic Electragliide… Been to Sturgis S.D. bike week several times always enjoyed the weather, we have no Spring or Fall.. just hot or cold.. Don’t deal with the House the Mouse built since they sold out, same reason I don’t watch anything FOX (contrary to the clowns rant} since they sold out to Disney…

        • When you point the finger at someone you have 3 fingers pointed right back at yourself. Their is a constant barrage of inflammatory remarks against liberals on this web site but that is obviously ignored by people like you. Now your just like Trump whining that you cannot stand the heat in the kitchen.

      • You said: “Please do not insult our intelligence with your link to the Far Right Wing Fake news site that is really laughable”
        My question is as obvious as your response is predictable… How can you insult something that does not exist.. you wouldn’t know intellect if it bit you on the ass…..

  18. Hey Beto..can you tell me why?..Ive owned my gun for 35 years and needed some quick cash for a bill due so I pawned it till payday, when I went to get it back I had to pay for a background check, now why is that? the common criminal buys his off the black market and doesnt have to wait!

    • There is a good reason for this background check. Anyone who is familiar with pawn shops knows its a magnet for crooks who steal things and then pawn them for quick cash. Since they have zero money tied up in their stolen merchandise they do not mind being ripped off by the pawn shop. And Pawn Shops know that if they get knowingly caught dealing in stolen merchandise they can lose their license.

      • I’m not a criminal, I owned the gun for years, why should I have to go thru the red tape (governments permission) to get my gun back..Chicago had over 600 murders in 2017, strict gun controls and not one pawn shop sell firearms!!

  19. To Old Guy

    “I am offended and mortified by your blatant use of the words “Far Right”. Your tone is hurtful…insensitive to others who may not share your profound beliefs and is decidedly hateful towards people that you do not even know. You are attempting to bully and marginalize people who are reading this site for entertainment or for educational purposes. There should be a Law against mean people like you on the Interwebz.”

    When you point the finger at someone you have 3 fingers pointed right back at yourself. There is a constant barrage of inflammatory remarks against liberals on this web site but that is obviously ignored by people like you as well as believing its being your god given right. Now your just like Trump whining that you cannot stand the heat in the kitchen. By the way I wear the badge “Far Left” with honor and if you believe in what you post you should wear the badge of “Far Right” with honor yourself. You must be feeling guilty.

    And since you mentioned people look for education on this site then why are you terrified of it? Education often comes from both sides of the political spectrum. If you came hear to hear your self your not going to learn anything.

    • Thanks for the laugh before bedtime…apparently you cannot discern sarcasm when you read it.

      You are proud of the “far left” label…ok, that’s your business.

      I do not consider myself to be “far right” as you seem to think. Looking over a sample of my postings, I fail to find any that would place me in the “far anything” category. On the other hand, your “facts” are typically emotionally based which tends to place them in the “less credible” category.

      I used to teach that perception defines reality to my students…meaning that everything that they say and do builds the image that others carry of them. You have built an on-line personality comprised of intolerance and impotent rage against what you “perceive” as “unfair”. At a guess, you have never read or studied the Constitution other than the talking points your “trusted sources” provide for you (complete with their interpretation). I pity you in that you apparently have no mind or desire of your own in which to check and verify the totality in which you choose to place your beliefs.

      PS: for an individual who was so concerned with my use of – is / are – earlier today your common grammatical usage and spelling has tanked in your last few messages…kinda like Beto at the polls.

      Sweet dreams.

      • “PS: for an individual who was so concerned with my use of – is / are – earlier today your common grammatical usage and spelling has tanked in your last few messages.”

        Not withstanding that you completely misunderstand my comment regarding “is/are” as being critical of your personal competency in grammar, if you have examples of flawed spelling a grammar in my comments, please advise. Always ready to improve and correct.

      • “I pity you in that you apparently have no mind or desire of your own in which to check and verify the totality in which you choose to place your beliefs.”

        You need to go back to school and take a course in reading comprehension. If you actually received a diploma from an accredited college you certainly should not have. I have provided plenty facts to verify my view points from various studies done both by the government and private organisations and by accredited news media outlets many of which are the most renowned in the entire world.

        And by the way using the “sarcasm dodge of the truth” about your post only makes you lose face far more than if you had just been man enough to stand by what you said from the beginning. I did not back down on my statements its only you who did.

        • I understand that English as a second language is difficult for you. If you will re-read my comment in question you will notice that it is written as sarcasm and blatantly so (I was imitating your frantic gotta-save-the-world style). Again, it’s a pity that you cannot discern the finer nuances of English…especially when they are as subtle as a pie in the face.

          Hasta luego baboso.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here