lying politician crossed fingers
Previous Post
Next Post

By MarkPA

Q: “How do you tell when a politician is lying?”

A: “His lips are moving.”

This is particularly true when the political topic is guns.We have even seen commentators on the left questioning their own side’s stance on gun control.

Jeffrey Goldberg’s 2012 Atlantic article:

“But these gun-control efforts, while noble, would only have a modest impact on the rate of gun violence in America. Why? Because it’s too late.”

Justin Cronin’s New York Times 2013 article:

“. . . I am my family’s last line of defense. I have chosen to meet this responsibility, in part, by being armed. It wasn’t a choice I made lightly.”

Jamelle Bouie’s Slate 2015 article:

“. . . assault weapons—there’s no official definition for the term, which makes identifying them for prohibition difficult, if not impossible . . . But out of 73 mass killers from 1982 to 2015, just 25 used rifles of any kind, including military-style weapons. Most used revolvers, shotguns, and semi-automatic handguns. Which gets to a related point: We might feel safer if we ban “assault weapons,” but we won’t be safer. Of the 43,000 Americans killed with guns since 2010, just a fraction—3.5 percent—were killed with rifles.”

Leah Libresco’s Washington Post 2017 article:

“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, . . . But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them.”

Alex Kingsbury’s New York Times 2019 article:

“. . . [C]alling for military-style rifles bans—as I have done for years—maybe making other lifesaving gun laws harder to pass.  America’s gun problem is far larger than military-style weapons, the mass killer’s rifle of choice. There are hundreds of millions of handguns in the country . . . The guns . . . are here to stay.”

After each mass shooting the demand for more gun control rises in proportion to the death toll.  Few Democrat politicians forego the opportunity to denounce guns in civilian hands.  Even a few Republicans now vie for their place in the line before the microphones.  But all this clamor for gun control is another BIG LIE.

Even if that progressive wet dream—repeal of the Second Amendment—happened, gun owners would defy the ban, burying their Cosmoline-coated guns in PVC pipe. Merciless enforcement might scare some, but there would remain hundreds of millions of firearms in patriot hands.

The most remarkable aspect of gun control advocacy is that proponents cannot explain how their “common sense,” “reasonable” measures will reduce gunshot mortality and morbidity.

Background checks are a perfect example of the unwillingness to acknowledge the ineffectiveness of a gun-control measure. For more than 20 years we have had in place an extensive regime, the National Instant Background Check System, required of all retail dealers. And almost all mass killers have passed this background check.

A few stole their guns or bought them illegally, sometimes violating state laws mandating background checks on private sales. Occasionally, the NICS process failed due to weaknesses in implementation. Also, straw buyers routinely buy guns on behalf of prohibited persons — yet these violations are rarely investigated or prosecuted.

Background checks can’t stop anyone with a modicum of craftsmanship from building his own gun. Nor can they influence robbers, traffickers or other criminals.

We should strive to improve the existing background check system for licensed dealers before expanding its scope, because it produces far too many false positive (and temporary) prohibitions. “Universal” background checks will not be the magic bullet that stops criminal “gun violence.”

“Assault weapons” bans are another example of a gun-control proposal that doesn’t stand scrutiny. The FBI reports more homicides by hammers, clubs and cutlery than by all rifles. Yet, no one speaks of banning cutlery or clubs (except in England, of course).

Just what would be banned as an “assault weapon” anyway?

Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy was asked: “What is a barrel shroud? And why should we regulate that?” She finally famously admitted: “I actually don’t know what a barrel shroud is . . . I believe it a shoulder thing that goes up.” A barrel shroud is just a fore grip that prevents the user burning his hand on a hot barrel. Neither this, nor any fore grip, have any influence on lethality of “military-type guns”.

There is no practical definition of an “assault weapon” that distinguishes it meaningfully from most other types of firearms. The attempt to do so would lead down the slippery slope to outlawing all semi-automatic firearms. But it’s politically and practically impossible to confiscate the ubiquitous semi-auto long gun in America, while handguns have already been defined by the Supreme Court as in common use and therefore inviolable.

In fact, none of the supposedly “reasonable”, “common sense” gun controls proposed stand up to political or practical scrutiny.  Gun control advocates know this and refuse to debate the effectiveness or economics of implementation and enforcement.  When challenged they always retreat immediately behind the shield of “We have to do SOMETHING!”

Stated clearly, we are being lied to. Politicians promise gun control to satisfy their fearful constituents, yet there is never any measurable impact on gunshot deaths or wounding.

Why? Because no gun control measure short of successful nationwide confiscation of all firearms could substantially affect these casualties.

Two-thirds of gunshot deaths are suicides, and a single-shot weapon does as well as one with a 100 round magazine for that. One-third of gunshot deaths are homicides;, and almost all injuries are attempted homicides. These are committed mostly by convicted felons, gang members, and in drug-related crime. Meanwhile, mortality due to firearm accidents has practically become a rounding error.

Until we are prepared to criminalize as many as half of all Americans, repeal of the Second Amendment won’t happen. Nor could it be passed while 42 states are right-to-carry jurisdictions and just 13 opposing states could block any amendment.

Politicians using gun control to mobilize their base on election day are also inflaming gun owners, motivating them to come out and vote against them. These effects seem, so far, to offset one another.

Why do progressives risk jeopardizing the rest of their platform for the promise of “reasonable” and “common-sense”, but impotent, “gun control”? Why do they pursue incremental gun control that can’t deliver on its false promise of reducing gunshot mortality and morbidity?

Maybe they’re lying to themselves as much as to the rest of us.


‘MarkPA’  is trained in economics, a life-long gun owner, NRA Instructor and Massad Ayoob graduate. He is inspired by our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and holds that having the means to defend oneself and one’s community is vital to securing them.

This post originally appeared at and is reprinted here with permission. 

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Politicians are just that, politicians…one would think that IF they were that “serious” or concerned, that they’d either surround themselves with knowledgeable people to give them the correct information, OR they’d bother to educate themselves so they don’t look like absolute imbeciles when spewing lies and hatred…

    Politicians will always be what they, opportunists, ready to latch onto anything that they think may further their agenda…

    • Sen. Corey Booker on ” Meet The Presstitutes ” admitted Sunday the goal is to take ” ANY ” gun control they can get , and come back for more , later.

      They have NO intention of ever stopping their insane disarmament demands.
      Giving up our Rights a little at a time , instead of all at once is not a ‘ compromise ‘.
      We must make sure the feckless G.O.P. , holds the line.

    • And that agenda is quite obvious to any reasoning-based thinking individual. These politicians are not so stupid as to believe that any of their gun-control proposals have the slightest hope of reducing violent crime. What they do believe is that the vast majority of U.S. citizens are brainless and will believe whatever the government spews instead of thinking for themselves.

      The only reason for supporting gun-control legislation is to gain more control over the general population. These laws bilk the taxpayers through additional spending to enforce these ridiculous laws with increased government and whittle-away at the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. All while doing nothing to solve the problem for which they are enacted.

      These proposals are not designed to curb violent crime, and will likely increase it by emboldening the criminal element, thereby enforcing our need for even more government control and intrusion into our personal lives; further enlarging the size of government.

      Even if we woke up tomorrow and firearms no longer existed on this planet, the evil, criminal minds that will intentionally murder and cause injury to innocent people will still exist and they will continue doing what they do using other means. Blaming/banning inanimate objects will not fix evil or criminal insanity. But it will remove the ability of the innocent to effectively protect themselves and their loved ones from acts of criminal violence, forcing our further dependency upon the government to protect us.

      You know it, I know it, practically every gun owner in these United States knows it. Most citizens of other countries that pay any attention to our politics know it. You can believe these politicians all know it as well. They may not know much about the firearms they condemn, but they sure as hell know the results of the actions they are taking to control their future “subjects”.

    • And once they learn how to shoot and about guns, they stop chattering on about gun control. These hypocrites ought to be out banning cars, which “cause” 32,000 deaths are year. Oh, that’s right, the drivers cause those deaths. Duhhhhh!

    • Before I would consider anything, I want to know the plan to take the guns (mostly obtained illegally) out of the criminals’ hands? Hearing nothing on that!

    • The first thing to do is examine why our current gun laws failed. If they failed due to lack of enforcement, make sure they will be enforced fully in the future. Such as actually prosecuting straw buyers and making sure prohibiting data actually gets put into the data base. There is absolutely no sense in passing more gun control laws if they wouldn’t have made a difference in any shooting or they won’t be enforced.

      • Our current gun laws failed, because they couldn’t not fail. They were designed to fail at their proclaimed goal – reduction of violent crime. Their real goal was empowering the state, while taking power away from the people. So when crime predictably doesn’t get positively affected, the gun grabbers come back screaming for more gun control. And even more next time. Until only government and criminals have guns.

  2. Enforce existing laws.

    Promptly investigate every NICS denial of a gun sale. Get rid of wrong info and arrest real bad guys, stop letting them walk.

    Rebuild the State and Federal mental health systems and hospitals that we tore down forty years ago.

    Fund the creation and training of violence prevention in schools and large employers. Train kids to be safe. Treat inner city youth gang violence as a communicable public health issue. Begin with these three:

    US Secret Service Safe Schools Initiative.
    NRA Eddie Eagle Program

    Back to enforce existing laws.

    Target repeat offenders. Every police agency and public prosecutor office should have this as a permanent detail. Small town or county agencies should team up with surrounding towns and communities.

    When a crime involves a gun bring the case to a team of prosecutors representing local, state and federal. Assess the jurisdiction with the best balance of probable conviction and severity of sentence.

    There’s a hell of a lot we can do about bad guy control and good guy protection.

    • I will happily trade low-level drug offenders that are in prison for drugs and putting away the violent criminals who used guns to intimidate or harm others…

  3. European and Japanese Gun laws work and work very well. Contrary to popular belief you can own a rifle or a shotgun in Japan but they have not had a gun related mass murder in decades and its because they have one of the most thorough gun vetting systems in the world and History has proven it works and works very well. Ditto for Britain, France, Germany and a host of other European Countries. In the U.S. any nut case, terrorist or criminal can buy a gun day or night 365 days a year.

    Lets face cold hard facts the Los Vegas Nut Case could never have killed 59 people and wounded 500 more in that short a space a time if high capacity magazines and assault rifles had been banned and confiscated. It is insanity beyond belief that any civilized country would allow such weapons of mass destruction lose among an ever growing populous of mentally ill people none of which can get or afford mental health care and it is all because of the Republicans refusing to pay for a National Health Care System while the Criminal Republican Greed Mongers gave themselves 2 trillion in tax breaks and they claimed that “they” not us could afford because we now have to pay for it, not them. When every other civilized Nation on earth has National Health Care as a Human right and they are far less rich and much smaller in size then we are it shows how criminal and corrupt the Gangster Criminal Republican Prostitute filth really is.

    According to the Gallup poles
    96% of the American People want universal back ground checks

    75% of the American People want a 3 day wait on the purchase of firearms

    70% of the American People want all guns registered with the Police.


    Thirty studies show that more guns led to an increase in violence and homicides


    After the 1994 Assault Rifle ban gun massacres fell by 37%
    and Mass shootings fell by 43% but when the Gangster Criminal Republicans let the ban expire in 2004 mass shootings more than doubled.

    When Australia banned and confiscated guns the result was mass shootings dropped by 43 per cent in the 7 years that followed the confiscations and bans.

    • Vlad,
      You still don’t get it, we’re not the Japs, the Chicoms, the Europeans, Aussies or Kiwis, we’re Americans. We want our firearms in multiple quantities and readily available.

      Our revolution got hot over control of firearms and stayed that way even though a majority of the Crown’s subjects wanted to remain “subjects” or were indifferent to the matter.

      The Europeans have set the example for all kinds of things in history including the last century, I’m not particularly impressed with the results and neither are many Americans.

      • Quote————————-Our revolution got hot over control of firearms and stayed that way even though a majority of the Crown’s subjects wanted to remain “subjects” or were indifferent to the matter.——————-quote

        Wrong. That is nothing more than Right Wing Propaganda. The Revolution took place because a bunch of greed monger criminal Businessmen led by a power mad and incompetent general (Washington) who was refused a generalship in the British Army because of his incompetence in the French and Indiana war. The Brits made the excuse he was not educated in a British Military school (correct) and that he was a “Colonial” original term for Hill Billy (also true). Its curious the Brits went out of their way to give Benedict Arnold a Generalship because although he too was not educated in a British Military School he was a battlefield genius. It shows you how little professional military men regarded the incompetent and arrogant Washington.

        I might add that after the war thousands of American “Loyalists” ,many of which were the most educated of Americans at the time, left for Canada and the British even resettled some of them in the Bahama Islands as well.

        The American revolution denied the American people democracy and the right to a parliamentary government and established a corrupt government founded by the filthy rich and for the filthy rich and it remains so to this very day. It was the most divisive war in American history that pitted Americans against Americans soon to be repeated in the American Civil War. The first war was unnecessary and the second very necessary to crush slavery in the Racist Southern States and defeat the filthy slime ball Southern Confederate flag waving traitors that started it. A few are still seething over their defeat to this very day. Someday we Socialists will turn Stone Mountain into a practice fire Artillery range and pulverized Stone Mountain into dust.

        • I take it, Vlad, that you are chomping at the bit for a third go at it.

          Well, if that’s the only answer you and those of your ilk will accept, then . . .

          Fortunately, those whom we elect to represent us aren’t quite so stupid. Far too much for them to lose suddenly; and, nothing to be gained in the long run.

        • “……Someday we Socialists will turn Stone Mountain into a practice fire Artillery range and pulverized Stone Mountain into dust….”

          Been there for around 310 million years. Throw all the artillery you want, won’t change a thing.

        • You are so ignorant I am not chomping at any bit I am copying and pasting and smoking a little meth.

          The Original Vlad Tepes

        • Vlad – Damn you are funny. Talk about a left wing nutjob… you are it!

          Only 10% of colonists favored revolution at the beginning of the Revolutionary War. That changed as the war progressed.

          On the ever of 18 April 1775, British Troops were dispatched across Massachusetts to confiscate all arms and munitions in the hands of colonists and to arrest those of the Founders the troops encountered. On the 19th, the British troops were met by armed colonists, leading to the “shot heard ’round the world” and ending any chance for a peaceful resolution to differences between England and the colonists.

          The war was fought over the fact that the colonial rulers were violating the rights of colonists while citizens in England continued to enjoy their rights. A petition for redress of grievances was presented to the Crown and ignored. If you do your research of English Common Law you will find that as far back as 15 June 1215, a set of rights had been drawn up and approved by King John, and which he later negated. It’s called the Magna Charta Libertatum. I believe it is under Article 13 where it says that any government which fails to properly address redress of grievances has created a situation which calls for the replacement of that government. Even English schools teach students better than you have apparently been taught.

          The authors of the 2nd Amendment (Madison and Mason) left written records which exist today explaining the intent of the 2nd. Anyone with a reasonable education should be able to understand that they didn’t trust any government, even the one they helped devise, and the made allowance for the people to protect their rights from the same experience they had experienced with England. They also made the Constitution difficult to change in order to preserve and protect those rights.

          As for your remarks about other nations; again you are wrong. I lived in Japan. criminals have guns. So, too, does England have a serious gun problem, and more and more people are demanding their right to arms be returned. More and more police officers are either armed or have arms readily available. Criminals still get guns and use them. In Australia, guns were banned in 1996. Last year, the government had another buy back because so many guns had not been turned in. Thousands of guns appeared, and the government believes there are many more thousands still in the hands of civilians. Further, they have a black market problem with guns coming in from Indonesia. They also have a problem with illegal aliens (Muslims) arriving from Indonesia. Criminals still have guns. In New Zealand, their first reaction was just like Australia… ban the guns. But, in NZ, the gun owners, for the most part, refused. The government went back to the table and decided to elevate the requirements to own a gun. Following WW1, most guns were banned from civilian ownership. When WW2 broke out, tons of arms were brought out from hiding and used by partisans and resistance fighters. Behind the Iron Curtain, guns were hidden away. I might add that the leaders of Poland and Ukraine both believe and have publicly stated that they need their own “2nd Amendment” for the people due to the experiences they had with the Soviets and with former leaders who were, in essence, Soviet puppets.

          I could go on, but you get the idea. You are way off base with a skewed view of the world. It is people such as yourself, and those who pass regulations about arms who drive the people to start a buying frenzy when they think something new will be passed. They are not going to do that and then turn in those arms. Even if they did, criminals would still have guns just as they did during Prohibition. I could point you to a number of mass killings which involved fires or explosives. Guns are not even in the Top 15 causes of death in the USA according to the most recent figures from the CDC.

        • “…because of his incompetence in the French and Indiana war.”

          terre haute was established as a result of this conflict, and subsequently the terre haute action track which in turn spawned the tony hulman classic. washington loved him some sprint car.

          at least as accurate as fuktards comments.

        • By the way, Vlad, pick up a British school history book. The colonists who were revolutionaries are written up as treasonous in about a page and a half. Washington got at least two pages praising his military genius. And that’s how the Brits see it. I spent part of my life growing up in Scotland. As traitors to the Crown, the Founders would all have been hanged or shipped off to Australia’s prison colony, and lost everything they had.

        • Vlad,
          For a failure George Washington sure manged to come out on the top end of things.
          As for a parliamentary form of government most people in the US are happy with what we have. Besides that parliamentary government in Britain allowed slavery for over 250 years, the US only had slavery for 76 years.
          I don’t know what you have against a mountain side but the last time I saw somebody shooting at a mountainside carving it was the disciples of the pedophile prophet destroying the Buddhas of Bamyan.

        • Hey, Vlad?

          BRING IT, cupcake. I am happy to have you PERSONALLY come to my house and seize my guns and ammunition. Please. PLEASE. Do it now.

          In addition to which, your understanding and knowledge of American history is as laughably stupid and ignorant as your knowledge of guns. If you didn’t have piles, you’d be a perfect @$$hole.

      • The price of Liberty is personal responsibility, self-determination and eternal vigilance. This is why a lot of intellectually lazy and emotionally immature people hate it. If you want to live in a society where you trust the government/nanny-state enough to hold a monopoly on arms, nobody is stopping you, most of the rest of the world should suit you just fine.

        But since Mr. The Impaler wants to start dropping stats, do you guys know the No. #1 unnatural killer of mankind was in the 20th Century?

        Governments, via both democide and genocide (not the same thing). Est. 262-335 Million murdered. Well over a quarter-billion lives. 4-6 times more than all wartime combat deaths during that same period.

        The governments differed. Some were monarchy/oligarchy, some socialist, others communist, others fascist still. But they had one thing in common; a monopoly on arms and a tyrannical governmental infrastructure. The entire reason our 2nd Amendment exists is as a bulwark against this exact threat. It specifically outlines the need for parity-of-arms and is one of the few that explicitly forbids the government from encroaching on that right via “…shall not be infringed.”

        Here’s a thought: if someone is deemed too dangerous to own a firearm via due process, WTF are they even doing among us in society? Firearms aren’t the only means of mass murder and mayhem. I’m of the mind that if you’ve done your time and have completed your sentence and justice has been served, you get released into society with *FULL* Constitutionally-protected rights restored. If you don’t feel that concept is right, then maybe that person shouldn’t be living among us at this point, if they can’t be trusted with their own Constitutional rights. I’m a fan of banishment, but to where?

        Also, I find it hilarious that we’re focusing on an inanimate object as if its existence is the reason mankind kills each other. It’s almost like we’ve not been doing this for thousands of years already—almost like it’s in our nature or something. I’ve looked into the face of evil, and as calming as it may be to bury your head in the sand and pretend there isn’t any in your little socio-economical bubble of life, it’s all around us and far more abundant than you may think. Your ignorance of them is all they need to continue their agenda.

        If you think that sort of thing couldn’t happen here, there were plenty of German citizens living during the Wiemar days, through WWII who said the same thing after the Holocaust, “We never thought that kind of thing could ever happen to us”.

        The overwhelmingly vast majority of gun-folk are law-abiding and responsible. But sure, to hopefully prevent a statistically minuscule number of deaths, let’s violate everyone’s Constitutional rights. I’m sure another era of prohibition will work just fine. That sure worked wonders with alcohol in the 1920’s. There was no crime or spike in violence surrounding that abrupt supply-vacuum .

      • Ranger Rick, don’t feed the vlad the troll. It’s spouting easily refuted BS to deliberately cause otherwise intelligent people to boil over with anger and frustration. Ignore it (vlad) and eventually it’ll crawl back into the hole from whence it oozed.

      • Ranger Rick, don’t feed the the troll that is vlad. It’s spouting easily refuted BS to deliberately cause otherwise intelligent people to boil over with anger and frustration. Ignore it (vlad) and eventually it’ll crawl back into the hole from whence it oozed.

    • Nonsense.

      Comparing nations with vast cultural and population differences is arguing among things that are not alike.

      Australia never had the cultural affinity for guns that the USA has. Nor did they fight for their freedom or to conquer their continent.

      With less than a twelfth our population they had fewer firearms in the entire country than any one of many American cities.

      The incidence of mass shootings was always a tiny percentage and far too small for any honest statistician to make any claims about.

      Australia did not succeed in confiscating all those guns even after massive spending, enforcement campaigns and heavily advertised amnesty periods. Today Australia continues to have a problem with home made guns, including machine guns, and gangsters smuggling all manner of guns into the country.

      The other thing about Australia is that private gun ownership has grown since the National Firearms Act. There are many more guns than ever before. Today they are fighting over, of all things, lever actions. Including some very interesting lever action shotgun designs.

      I’d like to see some of those Australian lever shotgun designs licensed to an American manufacturer. I think they’d sell!

      • quote——————-The other thing about Australia is that private gun ownership has grown since the National Firearms Act. There are many more guns than ever before.————quote

        If true then you just proved how successful banning assault rifles really was as never again did they have a mass murder the size of the first one.

        • And still you ignore the fact that mass shootings were always rare in Australia. You are comparing a near zero number to a near zero number. The only way to compare and come up with a claim that something is different in this problem is to tell lies.

          It is pure dishonesty and rampant partisanship to claim that Australia’s gun laws have altered a problem that was too small to measure in the first place.

    • Hey Vlad the Impaler,

      There’s a few Democrats who disagree with you about all of this.

      Congress of the United States
      Washington, DC 20515

      March 17, 2009

      The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
      Attorney General of the United States
      U.S. Department of Justice
      950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
      Washington, DC 20530

      Dear Attorney General Holder:

      As strong supporters of the Second Amendment, we were very concerned to see your recent remarks suggesting that the administration will push for the reinstatement of the 1994 ban on “assault weapons” and ammunition magazines.

      We believe that this ban was ineffective during the 10 years it was law, and would oppose its reenactment. Crime began falling before the ban was passed in 1994, and continued falling during and after the ban. The last time the murder rate was at its current level was more than forty years ago.

      Even the Urban Institute study of the ban’s effectiveness mandated by the 103rd Congress found that it could only have a limited effect because “the banned weapons and magazines were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.”

      It is hard to believe the ban would be any more effective in controlling crime by well-funded international drug traffickers, who regularly use grenade launchers, anti-tank rockets, and other weapons that are not available on the civilian market in the United States.

      The gun control community has intentionally misled many Americans into believing that these weapons are fully automatic machine guns. They are not. These firearms fire one shot for every trigger pull. Some of the guns that would be banned under proposed bills have been around for more than 70 years, and are often passed down from generation to generation.

      Many of our constituents lawfully own and use these firearms and ammunition magazines that would be affected by the new ban. Indeed, these are commonly owned firearms throughout the country. Law-abiding Americans use these guns for all the same reasons they use any other kind of gun – competitive shooting, hunting, and defending their homes and families.

      Our constituents also have very real and serious problems that we in Congress urgently need to address. People are worried about keeping their jobs, paying for their families’ health care, educating their children, and retiring with kind of security their parents and grandparents enjoyed. A long and divisive fight over a gun control issue will only distract us from giving these more important issues the attention they deserve.

      Again, we would actively oppose any effort to reinstate the 1994 ban, or to pass any similar law. We urge you to abandon this initiative and to focus instead on effective law enforcement strategies to enforce our current laws against violent criminals and drug traffickers.


      1. Mike Ross (D-AR)
      2. Tim Holden (D-PA)
      3. Jerry Costello (D-IL)
      4. Jim Matheson (D-UT)
      5. Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
      6. John Dingell (D-MI)
      7. Marion Berry (D-AR)
      8. Nick Rahall (D-WV)
      9. Gene Green (D-TX)
      10. Chet Edwards (D-TX)
      11. Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX)
      12. Gene Taylor (D-MS)
      13. Bart Stupak (D-MI)
      14. Collin Peterson (D-MN)
      15. Harry Teague (D-NM)
      16. John Tanner (D-TN)
      17. Allen Boyd (D-FL)
      18. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)
      19. Eric Massa (D-NY)
      20. Steve Kagen, M.D. (D-WI)
      21. Betsy Markey (D-CO)
      22. Paul Hodes (D-NH)
      23. Ron Kind (D-WI)
      24. Peter Welch (D-VT)
      25. Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
      26. Tim Ryan (D-OH)
      27. Walt Minnick (D-ID)
      28. John Boccieri (D-OH)
      29. Joe Donnelly (D-IN)
      30. Tom Perriello (D-VA)
      31. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
      32. Ben Chandler (D-KY)
      33. Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
      34. Debbie Halvorson (D-IL)
      35. Travis Childers (D-MS)
      36. Tim Walz (D-MN)
      37. Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
      38. Solomon Ortiz (D-TX)
      39. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA)
      40. Rick Boucher (D-VA)
      41. Mike McIntyre (D-NC)
      42. John Murtha (D-PA)
      43. Bart Gordon (D-TN)
      44. Zack Space (D-OH)
      45. Alan Mollohan (D-WV)
      46. Lincoln Davis (D-TN)
      47. Artur Davis (D-AL)
      48. Charlie Melancon (D-LA)
      49. John Barrow (D-GA)
      50. Christopher Carney (D-PA)
      51. Dan Boren (D-OK)
      52. Parker Griffith (D-AL)
      53. Charlie Wilson (D-OH)
      54. Heath Shuler (D-NC)
      55. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD)
      56. Jim Marshall (D-GA)
      57. Jason Altmire (D-PA)
      58. Larry Kissell (D-NC)
      59. John Salazar (D-CO)
      60. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)
      61. Frank Kratovil (D-MD)
      62. Glenn Nye (D-VA)
      63. Bobby Bright (D-AL)
      64. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ)
      65. Joe Baca (D-CA)

      • Your mentioning many who are not members of Congress but merely local political hacks pandering to their conservative constituency. They do not count when Congress determines whether or not to pass a gun control bill. Elisabeth Warrens Universal Background check law passed Congress and would have passed the Senate if Moscow Mitch McConnell had not tabled the bill. That is a fact.

        • Another lie. The letter is from 2009 and is signed by 65 House of Representatives Democrats at that time. Of course not all are still in the House, it’s been a decade.

          You want to see me support some legislation that will something about violence in America, then promote a bill to fund these:

          US Secret Service Safe Schools Initiative.
          NRA Eddie Eagle Program

        • It is also a fact that Lieawatha runs the House of Represenate with an iron fist made of Mike Bloombergs money. And it is a fact that lots of democrat represenators who voted for UBC will not be in the congress anymore after the 2020 election.

          Hey “Lieawatha and the Hairy Kameltow” would be a great name for an all girl Indie band.

    • Hey, Vlad, c’mon down to MS. We’ll even let YOU carry a gun concealed or open without a permit. And if you ask nice I know a couple good ol’ boys who’ll let you shoot their legal full auto sub guns. You’ll have to pay for the ammo you use of course. Who knows, you might even enjoy yourself. 😉

      • Thanks for the invite and although I have and do like shooting them they are too expensive to shoot for me even with hand loads. I still think that letting the general public own them is a very bad idea and the present laws restricting them seems to have worked as it has kept their ownership very low due to the cost of getting one.

        • Another liberal elitist who thinks he is better than everyone else. Why not let average people including minorities have easy access to automatics weapons? Not doing so is racist and classist.

        • Full auto’s aren’t all that rare. As of 2016 there were approx 500,000 in general public hands that the BATFE knows about. Probably well over that by now. And likely another several thousands they don’t know about. And that doesn’t count various artillery that is legally and illegally owned.

          As has been said: If gun owners were the problem, you’d know it.

          The real problem is politicians and rabid gun haters who want to punish everyone for the actions of a infinitesimally small number of bad actors.

        • I am sorry I did not mean to say any present gun control laws seem to work. I meant to say we need a common scents ban and confiscation of all NFA items. Please do not cut off my checks and please please please do not Clintoncide me.

          The Original Vlad Tepes

        • GunnyGene says: “Full auto’s aren’t all that rare.”

          Have to disagree on “rare”, there. A half million automatic firing guns, out of a total 400 million, is only 0.125% of all the guns. One eighth of 1 percent is definitely “rare”.

      • Don’t bet on it, Gunny,

        Vlad seems like the type who probably has quite a long rap sheet. If he didn’t get his guns illegally, he might have a problem passing a NICS check, eh?

    • Just curious Vlad – what forensic evidence can you point to that Paddock fired a single shot that night? Or that any of those rifles fired a single shot into the crowd? Because the FBI and LVMPD have presented precisely zero evidence that Paddock was the shooter or that those rifles did the shooting.

      • Vlad is wrong, sure. But you bringing crazy conspiracy theory stuff into it doesn’t help.

        Paddock did it. We are just lucky he was ignorant of firearms, not a gun person. With all his money he could have killed vastly more people had he left out the stupid bump stock and the low powered calibers. I know how but I am not going to say how.

        Not only could he have have killed many more people, he could have ignited the jet fuel takes he was trying to hit with his wimpy AR-10 (wimpy for that purpose I mean).

        • All I’m saying is the theory that Paddock did all that is just that. A theory. One that the FBI and LVMPD have provided very little supportive (and zero forensic) evidence of.

      • OK, I am NOT a fan of conspiracy theories, and I am quite prepared to believe that Steven Paddock was the shooter, BUT (and there’s always a big “BUT”, isn’t there?), the pictures of the scene taken IMMEDIATELY after the police breached the room show . . . perhaps a couple of dozen empty cases on the floor. Paddock supposedly fired a couple of thousand rounds, but even if it was only a few hundred, WHERE DID ALL THE BRASS GO????????

    • @Vlad, you are simply regurgitating the false claims of the uninformed “Chicken Little” leftist gun banners. All they ever do is repeat these lies and claim that “the sky is falling” endlessly. Educate yourself, remove the blinders, stop listening to those that continuously lie to you to frighten you into supporting their treason.

      Phil in TX

    • Those polls are as accurate as they were in the 2016 election, they are not. Also its wording in the questions. Very deceptive and no matter which answer you pick it is leaning for the left. Both sides can take skewed polls and cherry pick stats. When you ask Americans if there should be background checks they say yes of course. Answering that question as if there are no background checks already in place. The mass killing are in the last 25 years. It coincides with other factors the guns were always here. Psychotropic drugs started being used in mass about 20 years ago. The closing of mental health hospitals started in the 60’s, they needed that money to kill VC.

    • Yes, they kill themselves in many other ways in Japan, like jumping in front of trains and hanging themselves in forests. But it’s not “gun violence” so we don’t count it.

    • Fine then…lets emulate Japan…and be the most racist nation on the planet too!

      see this is how the game is played BOY

      everyone leaves out that little fact…JAPAN====the most raciest nation on the planet!

    • Let’s look at British gun controls. Illegal gun imports have soared by over 500% in the past five years? Last year there were over 44,000 knife crimes. Murders have increased by over 300% while crimes have increased by over 20% since last year. Its so bad London wants to ban knives. Gun controls work?

      In contrast Maine enact universal carry and since enacted crime has been reduced by over 35%. But Democrats embrace “their truths” not the facts.

      Let us examine Japan. Japan is a homogeneous nation where crime as we know it does not exist. For example the Japanese mob shook down a major Japanese golf club by buying adjacent real estate and threatening to establish a pig farm unless they were paid off. The Japanese mob sounds more like our Democrat Party.

      Violence simply does not exist in Japan. Japan also has no tradition of firearms ownship. Arms ownership has always been strictly controlled as a result of its class structure which made it illegal for those outside outside of the samuari class to be armed.

      Comparing firearms ownership in Japan and the USA is about as appropriate as comparing our laws as with those of the Vatican. Why not look at Switerland where every able bodied man has a fully automatic weapon, and when he leaves the military can retire with his military service weapon.

      As we all know Switzerland is a hot bed of mass murder and violence. Ever been to one of those bond conventions in Zurich?

      Vlad vomits forth the usual bromides without any evidence. No evidence has been produced on who was responsible for the Las Vegas shooting. Wonder why? Clearly nothing like the number of Americans he cites support further gun controls since the thousands of existing laws do such a wonderful job.

      Vlad and his posse of antifa thugs want to disarm the opposition so they can do to normal people what the Red Guard does in every nation where they are opposed. This is why gun controls have resulted in over 100 million dead in the last century. Want examples closer to the USA? Look at Mexico and Venezuela.

      Ask the people there if they think gun controls are a good idea. How about this required everyone to own a gun; teach gun safety and handling in 7th grade and up.

  4. Enforce existing laws. The current trend among democrat district attorneys is to not enforce laws because racism. Instead of working on getting blacks not to commit a crime in the first place, they’re working on not punishing them for committing a crime.

    • Yes and its now been the 50th anniversary since White Supremacists killed 4 little black girls at their church because the White Supremacists claimed only blacks committed any crimes in the U.S. I would guess you are attending the White Supremacists anniversary party over this horrific crime.

      And by the way Herr Hauptman locking up masses of people does not reduce crime when the cause of crime is lack of high paying jobs and affordable education and retraining. Thank the lack of these programs because of the Gangster Criminal Republican party who refuses to fund such programs.

      • You have zero critical thinking skills Vlad. I didn’t say anything about blacks being the only ones committing crimes. I’m well aware that scumbags come in all colors. There is a current movement by DA’s across the country to not enforce certain crimes. They are calling this criminal justice reform. They say there are too many black men in prison (no one seems to worry about too many white men in prison, even though prisons are full of them), so the solution they came up with was to not prosecute certain crimes. I’m saying the solution should be to work on preventing the crime in the first place, but of course this went over your head and all you know is to spout left wing talking points. By the way Vlad, are you black?

        • Your racial implications were very clear even to a mental midget. And I might add your only solution is to lock up more people i.e Blacks. Your post made that crystal clear.

          • Vlad you’re not only deaf and dumb but totally blind as well.if this ever goes hot the Patriots hunting you down will just find another coward pissi g his pants

        • The Obama administration specifically excluding blacks and Hispanics from being locked up for actual crimes and mental problems in order to massage the statistics lead directly to Cruz shooting up his school. Sounds like something that needs to be addressed.

        • I took the time to explain it so that even you could understand it, but you choose not to. I don’t think even you are too dumb to understand it, but maybe I give you too much credit. It’s actually funny that all I did was mention current policies that democrats came up with and you’re yelling racism at me. I don’t expect someone of your intellect to grasp the irony, but the other commenters here will get it.

        • “…its now been the 50th anniversary since democrats killed 4 little black girls at their church…”


        • To Dud Head

          quote——————–“…its now been the 50th anniversary since democrats killed 4 little black girls at their church…”—————quote

          Speculation. And remember old line White Supremacist Southern Democrats seldom voted with the majority main stream Northern Democratic Party. Fifty years have passed and these White Supremacists now vote solid Republican. Get with the reality of today not the dead hand of the past.

        • “Get with the reality of today not the dead hand of the past.”

          Says the guy that constantly brings up racism and slavery stories from decades or centuries ago. Why don’t you take your own advice hypocrite Vlad?

        • quote—————–Says the guy that constantly brings up racism and slavery stories from decades or centuries ago. Why don’t you take your own advice hypocrite Vlad?———–quote

          When I bring up racism it has directly to do with the White Supremacists of today and gives the historical background as to why they are that way. I am sure your fellow White Supremacists have not changed since those days. They may have changed political parties but not their racist ideology.

        • It’s good for me but not for thee. Got it Vlad. I hate to break it to you but I wasn’t around during the days of slavery or Jim Crow. Unlike rich, privileged left wingers like Beto O’Rourke or Ben Affleck, my ancestors weren’t even slave owners. Even if they were, there isn’t anything I could do about it since I didn’t exist until a few decades ago.

        • We pay him just enough to supplement his social security so he can buy the good dog food. He seems to be happy with that. We just wanted to make democrats look insane. How are we doing?

      • Blacks make up 13% of the US population and if you look at the real stats you would know most is black on black about 3% of them age 17 to 34. They account for the majority of homicides, yep 3%. However the number of blacks who kill whites is much higher than white on black despite the whites make up more than 60% of the population. Stop watching propagandist and find sites like GAO and FBI for your data.

      • How many whites have been killed by black racists. The number boggles the imagination and we can go back weeks not fifty years. But then again we see blacks slaughtering blacks every day, why should they respect whites. 70% of all homicides are committed by blacks, not suicides, not justifiable murders, homicides.

        So Vlad besides being a racist you are a mindless communist. Everyone of your posts exhibits the knowledge of a Zinn, the oratory of a Sharpton, the reasoning of an Obama, the judgement of a Sanders, the honesty of a Hildabeast, the commonsense of a Biden, the compassion of a Stalin, the integrity of a Fidel.

  5. Politics, Poli – more than one,Tics – blood sucking vermin,it doesn’t get any simpler or truthful than that.

  6. Vlad, there are 2 sides to every story. If you will do your homework, you will find that the excuse the North used for the war between the states was slavery. It was really taxes and the keeping the South agrarian, rather than allowing them industry. Even the great emancipator, Lincoln, said he would free all of the slaves, some of the slaves, or none of the slaves, in order to keep the Union together. He also had plans to ship the slaves out of the US, even though almost all of them had been born in the states. Lincoln was even more racist than most of the South at the time.

    • Nice try at trying at using smoke and mirrors and historical distortion. The Main Reason for the war was SLAVERY and this has been agreed upon by every Accredited Historian that has ever studied the War Between The States. It must be realized that your statement about Lincoln was distorted as well. It was thought at the time that blacks were an inferior race of people. Lincoln was not as racist as you claim as his actual thoughts were that Blacks who were for the most part not educated at the time and could not even read or write or had any skills and would be because of racism even refused menial jobs could not make enough money to take care of themselves or their families.

      • Using smoke and mirrors and historical distortion is my job and you should leave to me I am a professional liar. I know all the facts about president Abraham Lincoln he chopped down the cherry tree and he lead the charge up San Juan hill and he sent military advisors to Vietnam and he said “I did not have sex with that woman”.

        The Original Vlad Tepes

      • There are more slaves today than during the 19th century. Most in the Middle East and northern Africa. Estimates 30 million under some form of control.

      • Vlad:
        Slavery was never the main reason for the war between the states. How could it be? Prior to the war Lincoln offered a constituional amendment making slavery immune from change? Ah facts are so difficult to ignore? When the North invaded the South who among said we fight to end slavery? Zip, nada, nothing. No reasonable historian would ever argue that the main reason was slavery. But you reveal your grade school education.

        What are you a dance teacher at some elementary school? Did you major in socilogy or 15th century Albanian poetry, perhaps ABCXYXZ gender studies? No matter such ignorance is both revealing and astounding, equaled only by the candidates the Democrats nominate.

        You have a bright future in telemarketing condos or as a Democrat.

  7. “Lies, Damned Lies, and Politicians Talking About Guns”.

    Just look at Trump’s Orange face when he speaks.
    He always “sniffles” as he’s lying. Can’t trust the Commie.
    Every time he criticizes anyone he always uses the pronouns “EVERYBODY” knows or “EVERYONE” knows but, he never mentions who Everybody or Everyone is by name.
    What a cowardly creep. Gotta impeach the low-life.

  8. Quite often, firearms owners are their own worst enemies. The duck hunters don’t like the AR-15 “black rifles” so they see no problem if attempts are made to ban them. The traditional rifle owners don’t like machine guns, so they have no problem with them being legislated out of existence. Some pistol owners see nothing wrong with certain long guns being outlawed just as some rifle owners would have no problem seeing pistols banned. You see, anti-gunners want them all. They will chip away a little at a time until their goal of civilian disarmament is complete. They have an excuse for banning every firearm. Scoped bolt-action rifles are defined by anti-gunners as “sniper rifles” because they are “too accurate”. Magazine-fed weapons are suspect because of high (actually normal) magazine capacity. Handguns are suspect because they are “easily concealable”. The gun grabbers want them all and have made (flimsy and suspect) excuses for banning every type of firearm. They don’t care how long it takes. and will use incrementalism to their advantage.
    Friends, ALL firearms advocates must “hang together” and realize that an assault on ANY means of firearms ownership and self-defense is an assault on ALL forms of firearms ownership and self-defense.
    There is absolutely NO ROOM for complacency among ANY Second Amendment supporters. An attack on one is an attack on ALL…
    ALL firearms laws are unconstitutional on their face. Imagine the hue and cry if “reasonable” restrictions were placed on First Amendment activities, especially with the “mainstream media”. The Second Amendment is clear–what part of “shall not be infringed” do politicians and the media not understand…of course, they understand full well…it’s part of their communist agenda…
    Even the NRA bears some responsibility for capitulation on matters concerning firearms. The NRA failed when it allowed the National Firearms Act of 1934 to stand without offering opposition, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the NICS “instant check” system, the “no new machine gun for civilians” ban in 1986, the so-called “assault weapons” ban in 1994, and other infringements of the Second Amendment. Let’s face it. What better way to increase membership than to “allow” infringements to be enacted and then push for a new membership drive. Yes, the NRA has done good, but its spirit of “compromise” will only lead to one thing…confiscation.
    If the NRA is truly the premier “gun rights” organization, it must reject ALL compromise…

    • quote———————–The NRA failed when it allowed the National Firearms Act of 1934 to stand without offering opposition, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the NICS “instant check” system, the “no new machine gun for civilians” ban in 1986, the so-called “assault weapons” ban in 1994, and other infringements of the Second Amendment. Let’s face it. What better way to increase membership than to “allow” infringements to be enacted and then push for a new membership drive.————-quote

      Bullshit. The Clinton Assault Rifle Ban had the votes to pass and the NRA new it so they made a compromise and agreed to the ban if the ban would sunset in 10 years if the crime rate did not go down. It was the best deal the NRA could get at the time. If there had been no NRA the Assault Rifle Compromise it would have been permanent. That is historical fact and anyone who has studied gun legislation is well aware of that fact.

      • You so called People of the Gun do not know your own history so I will explane it to you. When President Abraham Lincoln signed the Clinton Assault Rifle Ban he wanted it have a sunrise provision so it would automatically reknew every 10 years but the evil NRA confused the Represenators and they made it a sunset provision instead. Now do you understand all the true facts?

        The Original Vlad Tepes

  9. Wonderful article that outlines all “common sense”. As I read it, all I can think about is my liberal Facebook “friends” who would dismiss it as right wing propaganda. Still, although I have read and said similar things hundreds of times, I never tire of the truth.

  10. If they have such a strong motivation to take away “military style rifles” and semi automatic firearms, it just means they feel like they have to do it because of what they are going to do to you next.
    1. Cashless society.
    2. Universal surveillance police state.
    3. Euthanasia of old people (population control).
    4. Forced abortions – globally Bernie? (population control).
    5. Massive unemployment – especially the opposition party.
    6. Removal of all national borders. (Unlimited migration)
    7. Free stuff for everyone – except the opposition party.
    7. Zero Free Speech – especially for the opposition party.

    This is the future unfortunately. Buckle up! Hope you know Jesus so you can go in the Rapture before the Tribulation begins.

  11. @ enuf says:
    September 15, 2019 at 12:29

    GunnyGene says: “Full auto’s aren’t all that rare.”

    Have to disagree on “rare”, there. A half million automatic firing guns, out of a total 400 million, is only 0.125% of all the guns. One eighth of 1 percent is definitely “rare”.

    Ok, if you’re criteria is just number crunching stats. However, the reality of a half million plus full auto’s is somewhat different. 🙂 As I mentioned earlier, if gun owners (in particular full auto owners) were the problem, people would know it. 🙂

    • I highly doubt there are 500,000 fully automatic weapons in private hands. They been illegal since, what, 1986? Legally one is almost impossible, very expensive, not counting the 8-25,000+ plus tag for each individual weapon.

  12. Do you know the difference between a horse race and a political race? In a horse race, they run the entire horse. If they pass some of these asinine control laws people will start working on the swap cylinder revolver although full moon clips are fairly quick.

  13. “Why do they pursue incremental gun control that can’t deliver on its false promise of reducing gunshot mortality and morbidity?”

    In a word: Precedent.

  14. Kinda redundant, dont ya think? Lies, damn lies, and politicians? But, so easy to do when you own the media, or vice versa!

  15. There is now an official definition of assault rifle. By voter referendum in 2018 Washington State defined assault weapon as any semi automatic rifle. Rimfires and tube magazines were not excepted. The Remington Speed Master, Browning SA-22, Marlin 60, and Ruger 10/22 are by legal definition assault rifles in the State of Washington. Included in the referendum is a training requirement and waiting period. Washington State is well on the way to becoming California-north.

Comments are closed.