Thanks to MSNBC, we learn that Presidential hopeful and self-professed gun control moderate Bernie Sanders wants to ban “weapons designed solely to kill people.” So AR-style rifles are safe! After all, you can use them to hunt, shoot at paper targets and cook bacon. So that means Senator Sanders wants to ban … thermite grenades? I guess the fact that you can use a thermite grenade to light a gas grill doesn’t figure. Either that or the word “consensus” doesn’t mean what Bernie thinks it means. Meanwhile, I’d like to know . . .
how many hunters take a train from Vermont to the mid-west? A horse and buggy would be faster.
Meanwhile, Rachel Maddow tells Bernie that a train passenger has access to their gun on an Amtrak train. Nope. It has to be inside checked baggage. And you have to inform Amtrak’s hugely efficient staff that you’re traveling with a firearm 24 hours before you go. Because guns.
Obviously Bernie doesn’t know that, or much else about guns. But he should know that President Obama signed the law that enabled gun owners to check their guns onto trains. I wonder what Maddow would have made of that.
Still, there’s reason for pro-gun rights advocates to hope. In the clip (not magazine) above, Sanders agues for compromise on gun rights by saying that “people who think they should have a missile launcher in their backyard as a constitutional right may not have them.” Which means they might! Personally, I draw the line on the right to keep and bear arms at aimed weapons. Wait. Isn’t a missile launcher an aimed weapon?
The best news of all: Sanders’ opponent, Hillary Clinton, has forced the Vermont legislator to face the ballistic music. By attacking Bernie on guns, Hillary has had to reveal her strident position on (i.e. against) firearms freedom. Come the general election, there will be loads of commercials using her words against her. Awesome.
Come after my backyard missle launcher, I dare ya.
You aim a missile launcher! 🙂
Good point! Text amended.
If anyone still believes the repeat the lie enough times. Bernie is a complete liar. As most here already know.
Everything he says in this video is complete BS. Maddow is even more ignorant. Ammo is always available on a train now??
Is it being sold by the conductors??
I also feel if the Dems/Libs keep this up. They will be burying themselves come next years elections.
The American voters maybe ignorant. I dont believe they are total fools. Or maybe they really are.
There are millions of evil (D) out there that will squeeze a butt pimple to make you another hillary/sanders should they drop out. Your evil gov’t is only 1/3 as evil as your POS neighbors that comprise it, and they are only 1/3 ase evil as those who voted for them, because they want this sh_t.
A civil war isn’t a war on gov’t. It’s a war on your neighbors who enjoy regurgitating this problem for us at every election, from dog catcher to school board, to community organizer.
There should have been a “trigger warning” that the Bernie video involved Maddow the biggest flaming ***radio edit*** on the planet.
Thermite is very useful in exit hermit welding of dissimilar metals or burning holes through engine blocks.
Thermite grenades were originally designed for Youtube videos.
“Exit hermit” welding?
Chalk that one up to autocorrect. He likely means exothermic.
Well dang. Guess I can stop trolling YouTube looking for a hermits exit being welded by a thermite grenade.
I love how many times I heard that ol bernie was a moderate on gun control… HA!
Compared to Bloomberg, that IS moderate!
Haha. Compared to Bloomturd that is almost “common sense”.
Exactly. Not so long ago TTAG comments were full of people claiming Bernie!™ didn’t want to take your guns because Vermont or something. A socialist is a socialist is a socialist. Never trust a socialist.
No candidate will run on a 100% pro-2A platform. It’s political suicide.
Fact is most Americans don’t own a firearm and are not in favor of unregulated access to firearms.
Even worse, too many firearm owners rarely even shoot their guns!
The RKBA is a right that very few people actually exercise. That’s why it’s constantly under attack.
If by “very few” you mean 1/3 of the adult population, sure.
Everybody but Brent = very few, and he really has to get out more. Not just outdoors but out of his state.
Very few, huh?
Hundred of millions of guns, as just an estimate, and just a few people who have them…
You probably believe only a handful of perverts are keeping the multi-billion dollar Internet porn industry afloat too.
Personally I don’t know where the money comes from. I get all my porn for free….
I did that thing where I said too much again, didn’t I?
Don’t pay for things you know how to get for free, that my motto…. Well, that, and everybody wang-chung tonight.
I keep forgetting. All right, I admit to wang-chung procrastination.
“Fact is most Americans don’t own a firearm and are not in favor of unregulated access to firearms.”
While this may be true (citation needed), and even though “they may not be in favor”, I strongly suspect that this is NOT the hot button issue for them in any election.
I’m just waiting for all those pro-gun socialists hereabouts to reassure us that Bernie really doesn’t mean it. Or something. I’m also waiting for Hillary! to channel Anne Richards and Bill himself, shoulder an over-and-under, don some camo, and have her picture taken in front of a stock pond to show all the Fudds that she really doesn’t want to take their Brownings…ha! ha!
“Either that or the word “consensus” doesn’t mean what Bernie thinks it means.”
Consensus to a Progressive means they have enough votes to ram it down the public’s throat and the Constitution be dammed.
There’s already a consensus. A majority don’t want it, and and an amendment to the Constitution requires a super-majority. Further, a civil war only requires one vote.
Please re-read Article V of The Constitution of the United States of America.
There is a reason the Founders made it difficult to amend the Constitution. There is also a very good reason they included a method to amend the Constitution that did not rely on the politicians in Washington to implement.
The process is still difficult, maybe more difficult, but it exists and would certainly be preferable to armed conflict. Only if the Article V convention cannot be accomplished should the option of compelling the Blue states to secede through force of arms be considered.
His just as deranged on firearms freedom issues as he is on economic and social issues. Can someone please come get Grandpa and take him back to the attic?
I don’t think Bernie actually wants to be President. He just wants to scratch ‘Ran for President’ off his bucket list before he kicks it.
It’s too bad Biden didn’t go for it. I was really hoping to see this in a campaign commercial- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c23RegP8lU
It’s a vanity project for himself…..proven by the fact that he took the Emails off the table in the last debate.
This way he still gets invited to all the Washington parties, gets tongue baths by the leftist press, and most importantly doesn’t get killed by Clinton assassins.
A commie wants to take away individual liberties? This is my shocked face
Simply stated. Too the point. +1
My generation ended communism.
Name anyone under 23 who knows what a commie is?
There are probably a few who know.
There are, unfortunately, many more who might as well be commies themselves.
I screwed my courage to the sticking place and got thru most of the vid. And it occured to me–pocket semi-autos (like my P-64) really are designed essentially to shoot people. The P-64 certainly was; it is a military sidearm. Pocket semi-autos really aren’t DESIGNED for target-shooting or hunting. Am I correct then in assuming that Bernie thinks he will ban all pocket-sized semi-autos? How about the 1911? I know it is used for target shooting, but it was DESIGNED as a military weapon, to shoot people with. Ditto snub-nosed revolvers, designed as concealable self-defense weapons for urban environments where encounters with other critters happen close-in. The truth is, any rifle, including an AR, is much more versatile in terms of alternate uses than the small handguns designed particularly for self-defense against other humans. That “designed solely to kill other people” crap is a wide-open door to Fudd utopia–right up until the .gov “reminds” them that even an over-and-under can be sawed off and become something “designed solely to kill people”, and really needs to be locked away–by the .gov.
Basically all handguns are designed for shooting people, as are many rifles. Shotguns would be relatively safe, except for the cool ones like the VEPR and KSG.
“Designed for” is a philosophical question not a demonstrable and provable thing.
In a sane world, a country having a strong military capable of projecting force is really intended to protect the country and when everything works correctly results in the absence of war. It is the same with self defense.
And wether you are speaking of a country or a single man, the goal is the same.
All law abiding, responsible gun owners would say the same thing ‘shooting anohter person is the last thing we ever want to do’. It would seem the purpose of the gun – what it was designed to do, is to prevent violence!
My gun will spend literally 99.9…% of it’s time making noise and holes in paper, with luck that will be 100% of the time. If we are speaking in terms of actual use alone, it would seem the gun was designed solely to throw a projectile at speed towards a specific place downrange, and that is ALL.
If you really want to get down to Clinton-esque parsing of terminology: No gun was EVER designed to kill people (by inclusion, shotguns,handguns, and rifles). The ammunition is designed to kill people – the firearm is only a machine designed to deliver the most effective people-killing projectile at a specific point down-range.
Of course guns are designed to kill people. That’s why they’re so effective at deterrent!
I’m for curmudgeon control, but msnbc has thwarted that.
Is being concerned with a missile launcher the same as being concerned with a spring loaded box?
Without the missile it’s just a ramp with some wires.
Still prefer him over Clinton if I HAD to choose between the two.
If it came down to that choice I would just let someone else choose. I don’t see how one could possibly be better than the other in any meaningful way.
Bernie is the “socialist” kook to make Clinton seem moderate. The entire Democratic presidential contingent is designed to prop up Hilary. Except for Biden, because if he decided to run all bets were off. Clinton’s nomination is a foregone conclusion with Biden out unless she gets indicted. Last I heard the FBI was still investigating.
The really interesting race is the Republicans. Jeb was supposed to be the man and the sideshow known as Trump/Carson was supposed to be a mildly entertaining distraction. Looking at the Republican field today, I don’t see anyone that is going to beat Clinton.
I told my wife that if Hillary wins I am moving to my yet to be purchased compound in Idaho. I am mostly kidding.
It’s a shame that people feel like its a “lesser of two evils” scenario when I comes to voting. I say don’t vote for any of the stoolies. That way when my rights start disappearing the only people I have to blame are those out there that actually spent the time voting for these head up ass puppets
I draw the line at crew served weapons with explosive projectiles. These should be the property of the militia and stored in armories. Along with grenades and rpg’s, etc.
To cartoon commie caricature Bernie Sanders, consensus does NOT negate my rights as a sovereign individual. As for my guns, come and take them !
This man is the type of government that the 2A was in part written to protect us from. The other parts being the natural right of every living creature to defende itself.
Blah blah blah…communist…cough…spit.
The differences between those two gun-grabbing Social Security eligible cranks is about the same as the difference between Left Twix and Ultra-Left Twix.
And here I used to like Twix-the dark chocolate ones, at least. Always stocked up when in the UK.
I hate it when they try to equate things like missile launchers, jet fighters, atomic weapons, and other ordnance to a semi-automatic ar-15. They are not even in the same category but they try to use in absurdum to suggest that somehow an AR 15 and a missile launcher are equal in some way and because we ban missile launchers that the ar-15 can be banned just as easy.
Have you read the Constitution or the Second Amendment? There are no qualifiers contained in the 2A and the Constitution specifically allows the government to contract heavily armed ships – Privateers – to conduct raids on behalf of the country. Early militias, and therefore early individuals, had, used and supplied every sort of weapon of war available at the time.
If the people, by definition each individual, can or even MUST be trusted to keep and bear arms until they/he poses a threat (else he is guilty until proven innocent), by what Constitutional mechanism may the government deny access to any sort of arms?
The point is that the government has no authority to decide what arms we may own, since the purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow the people the ability to fight off an oppressive, tyrannical government, foreign or domestic. If that same government can compel us not to own the same sort of weapons that government would attempt to deploy against us to protect its tyrannical state, how does the Second Amendment make any sense?
In order to save the Two Party System, the DNC needs the GOP to survive 2016.
Therefore, the DNC has decreed that HRC must be the candidate, and she must make herself more hated than Piers Morgan and Eric Holder so that conservatives and constitutionalists will vote for the GOP candidate no matter how anticonservative or anticonstitution he might be.
Precisely. The Powers That Be know that after eight years of Obama, they won’t be able to sneak much more by on the back of another liberal president. So we’ll get a RINO instead, who will dutifully chip away at our rights from another angle, all the while cheered on by “conservatives” who are more concerned that their “team” wins than the welfare of the republic. After a few years of that, we’ll be ready for another dose of progressivism, and the cycle repeats.
The only question remaining in my mind is whether or not Hillary knows the score and is playing the villain in expectation of a future payoff, or have the real power brokers actually convinced her that she could be president?
I agree that he can create a consensus on gun control, and that consensus is LOCK AND LOAD.
He’s right you know. And consensus against gun control seems to be at an all time high. We have Obama, Clinton, and Feinstein to thank for that.
I might be misinterpreting this wrong, but sounds like he wants to legalize straw man purchasing. 1:03-1:11
These @ssholes, I am so tired of the “you can’t own a bazooka, so why should you be able to own an AR-15!?”
They have no problem providing these types of weapons to “moderate” Muslims over in the Middle East. F-cking hypocrites.
I have no interest in what Bernie Sanders says. He has no chance of beating HRC.
And if he did, he would have no chance of being elected as POTUS.
I give the guy credit for speaking his truth- but socialism simply doesnt work, and we are already seeing it in Obamacare, the USPS, Amtrak, etc.
To quote Thatcher, the problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of other peoples money.
Socialism in measured doses has driven the greatest periods of prosperity the U.S. has ever know. The real question is what it’s used for, and it turns out that socialism used properly can actually enhance the performance of a free market. Any other kind of socialism is automatically suspect.
Winter is coming…stock up
The constitution of a state is a loophole? How stupid do they think we are? Oh, wait…
consensus (n): Complete adherence to progressive ideals, compelled by force of law and / or accusations of racism against any dissident.