Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

 

Senator Chris Murphy believes that the tide is finally turning in favor of the gun safety movement in America.

Even as Murphy acknowledges that more work is needed to address gun violence, the prominent Connecticut Democrat maintains that a growing backlash to mass shootings has brought the country to the brink of a sea change – 10 years after the devastating Sandy Hook school shooting in his home state.

“We’ve built a movement in this country in the last 10 years that today, I would argue, is more powerful than the gun lobby,” Murphy said in an interview for a special episode of the Guardian’s Politics Weekly America podcast.

“I think we are now poised to rack up victory after victory for gun safety,” he said.

— Joan E. Greve in Senator Chris Murphy: ‘victory after victory’ is coming for US gun control

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

79 COMMENTS

  1. “Victory after Victory for Gun Safety” . . . Gun Safety has nothing to do with stopping others from MURDERING people. Firearms EDUCATION would be a good start, if he really MEANS ‘Gun Safety’ and NOT Gun CONTROL. While they’re at it, maybe they should teach RESPECT FOR LIFE, and the RIGHTS of Others to LIVE when they don’t agree with everything you believe. Sadly, it is Not truly about stopping what’s taking place throughout the WORLD, it’s about controlling the people in the USA.

  2. Don’t these fools ever read the news? Millions of Americans are changing their minds, and buying their first guns. They don’t have the votes to enact gun control, certainly not to make a constitutional amendment.

    Oh, wait. I forgot. Mainstream media is just the commie pinko Marxist’s echo box. They can read the “news” all day long, and never get any facts.

    • minor49iq below…POTUS DJT voters smell democRats when a rotten ratbassturd like joe biden who could never draw a crowd wins an election after key states shut down vote counting simultaneously while POTUS DJT was well ahead.

      You and the closet pervert darcydodo assist in f-ing up America’s prosperity and you are a threat to freedom no different than rapists, child molesters, kidnappers and the like are threats to an individual’s Freedom. Scumbags like you are propagandists for the lying, scheming lowlife democRat Party where the anti American, anti Constitution, anti Freedom moto is: The ends justifies the means.

      • I’m so totally onboard with Daniel Horowitz. Federal elections don’t even matter. See what happened with the Disrespect for Marriage act right after R wins? I’m not saying give up on voting integrity or candidates, but the Republican Party is so soiled and turncoat we need to force a realignment. Lip service is over.

    • Except that they keep voting for Democrats. Oregon 114 is the proverbial canary in the coal mine. It’s not about “scary black assault” whatevers. It’s not about “high capacity” magazines. It’s not about semiautomatic versus single shot/revolver or whatever else.

      The end game is all civilian firearms. While logistically very difficult, if not nearly impossible, it doesn’t matter. Once the laws are changed, all immigrants are granted amnesty, Dems win a super-majority in Congress to write all new voting laws, stack courts, impeach previously confirmed federal judges and use their 22M new citizens to help give Dems supermajorities at the state level, it’s over. They run the financial systems. They basically run the communications systems. The federal government controls significant amounts of state revenue to compel law enforcement compliance.

      The ATF/FBI know you’ve bought a gun at some point. Now, they simply tear down every property you own to find them. Lost in a boating accident, oh well. You don’t have proof, so they change the law to be retroactive on reporting theft/loss. When you have the power to make the laws, enforce the laws and rule them to be “Constitutional” by stacking SCOTUS, you win. It’s done.

      Regardless of what Miner may claim, this is, and has always been, the end game for the progressive Marxists now running the party. In the past, you could be a moderate Democrat with a focus on social issues and be somewhat supportive of some interpretations of the Second Amendment.

      That is no longer the case. The Marxist progressive inmates are running the Democrat leadership asylum. If they continue to consolidate and grow their power, they will do what they want. The Constitution is just an old piece of paper that is there for the rewrite as times change and needs change.

      • Well Civil War Two will them commence and we’ll wipe out the fringe far left Marixts once and for all. How many Ex Military do you honestly think will bend over and let Liberals trash the Constitution ? We far out number any influx of illegals from anywhere. They can join their Marixt buddies in hello !

  5. Actually, it is surprising that any of you folks care about any Supreme Court decision.

    After all, your patron saint, the ‘Chosen One’ is calling for the termination of the constitution which would also terminate any Supreme Court authority over the People.

    “Former President Donald Trump called for the termination of the Constitution to overturn the 2020 election and reinstate him to power Saturday in a continuation of his election denialism and pushing of fringe conspiracy theories.

    “Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” Trump wrote in a post on the social network Truth Social and accused “Big Tech” of working closely with Democrats. “Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”

    • @Miner49er

      “Actually, it is surprising that any of you folks care about any Supreme Court decision.

      …
      Former President Donald Trump called for the termination of the Constitution to overturn the 2020 election and reinstate him to power Saturday in a continuation of his election denialism and pushing of fringe conspiracy theories.”

      Here you are again ranting about your obsessive internet word crap masturbation interest Trump.

    • Did anyone else hear a weird noise. Sounded something like a deluded, partisan, Leftist/fascist freakazoid spouting a narrative, without understanding a word of it. Nah, probably just me. But it did sound quite strident . . . and ignorant . . . and absurdly partisan . . . with a SERIOUS case of TDS.

      Probably just the wind blowing through the crack of some hooker’s arse. Very similar sound.

    • @Miner49er

      “accused “Big Tech” of working closely with Democrats. ”

      Which it turns out to be true. The recent release of internal emails and documents from Twitter, also known as part of ‘Big Tech’, for events that happened for the 2020 election period show a concerted effort from Twitter management and employees, which were all liberal left wing democrat politically, to suppress and ban and remove speech and people at request of the democrats that the democrats did not like and intentionally suppressed and/or removed anything to do with the Hunter Biden laptop story which it turns out is true also and not Russian dis-information the left wing media tried to spin it as. In short, Twitter and the Democrat party were election tampering, and keeping important information from the American people by a collusion between Big Tech in social media and legacy media and the democrats.

      Yes, those democrats which includes your love interest Joe Biden. Yes, those democrats you try to hold up as saints being completely innocent – were tampering with the U.S. election by colluding with Big Tech. And not to forget the Hunter Biden laptop that contains information showing Joe and Hunter Biden making deals with enemy’s of the United States. And now that republicans have majority control of the House and can decide what gets in and out of committee instead of being suppressed like they were before because democrats had majority control there’s gonna be some investigations probably.

    • The fascist left has been actively working to destroy the constitution and the country for decades.

      Trump makes one statement and he’s evil, on a level with hitler. You cannot make this stuff up.

    • quote rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” Trump wrote

      SO WHERE did he call for dumping the entire Constitution, dimwit? When you quote someone how’s about including the whole sentence? Lies of omission are still lies.

    • Pretty sure you’ve wandered into the wrong time line minor, AGAIN. Nothing you say even remotely resembles reality as the rest of all cognizance is aware.

    • Trump is old news. Loud, bombastic, narcissistic, but old, nonetheless. He’s a distraction now. By focusing attention there, it plays into the progressive Marxist hands.

      “Look at that loud guy, nothing to see here.”

      The leadership and most rank and file Democrats want all guns confiscated. That’s the goal, and the only real barrier to their total tyranny for decades, if not generations.

  6. If putting anti-2A laws on the books is considered a victory, then, yes, Dims will have dozens of victories between now and Dec2023.

    There is no downside to enacting unconstitutional laws. Those voting for the law win by putting the matter into effect, while running the appeasl gauntlet. After that, if the anti-2A mob loses appeals, they can enact even worse laws, and start the dance again.

    We are now in an era of actual lawlessness, at the hands of the law writers.

    • “There is no downside to enacting unconstitutional laws.”

      Correct, unfortunately.

      It costs them next to nothing, and real money for us to fight.

      I hate Leftist Scum ™ like Murphy… 🙁

      • Real money on both sides, as citizens defending our rights, and as taxpayers having to defend the stupid laws they pass.
        Maybe we should push for a constitutional amendment that would hold politicians personally liable when passing unconstitutional laws. When the money to defend comes directly out of their pocket, it might make them think twice.
        Kind of like the anti-2A people who are trying to get around the PLCAA by suing gun manufacturers for deceptive advertising, or whatever it is they are doing.

        • constitutional amendment that would hold politicians personally liable when passing unconstitutional laws.

          no amendment needed. The remedy is alrady IN the Constitution. They a,, must swear an oath when they take up their office. Wilfully refusing to uphold that oath is felony perjury.WHEN will those violating theor oaths be brought to justice?

    • Unfortunately, Sam, there IS a major downside . . . just not one the Leftist/fascists care about. The downside is simply the (rapidly increasing, according to ALL polls . . . if you believe polls), and that would be lack of belief in, and respect for, laws and civil society. The ‘bluest’ blue states, like CA, NY, NJ etc., are doubling down on their anti-2A nonsense, KNOWING the laws they are passing are unconstitutional, will ultimately be overturned by SCOTUS (unless they succeed in packing the court), but they do it, anyway.

      Imagine how motivated a pro-2A person will be to ‘turn them all in, Mr. and Mrs. America’, when the Dims intentionally ignore binding SCOTUS decisions.

      As a simple thought experiment, imagine if Alabama decided to enact a law restoring slavery. CLEARLY unconstitutional, needlessly divisive, bomfozzlingly stupid . . . but these Leftist/fascist idiots are doing the exact same thing by adopting these laws that clearly violate the 2A, and Bruen, and Heller, because they know they can, and that the “downside” to them is years of litigation, and when they are finally thrown out by SCOTUS (unless they pack the Court in the meantime), they’ll just start all over again.

      Meanwhile, the average person looks at ALL of it in disgust. THAT is a major societal downside.

      • Thinking there is no downside to the people enacting unconstitutional laws, only the joy of aggravating the “deplorables”, and causing 2A defenders to bankrupt themselves in court (the Dims have vastly more billionaires than 2A defender organizations).

        The Dims are justly confident that the SC does not have the stomach for constantly dealing with 2A cases, and will decide to grant fewer and fewer reviews of the unending assault of gun control.

        • Sam,

          Still disagree. Yes, that is the short-term, ‘practical’ result of this kind of nonsense. But a pattern of this kind of behavior undercuts the ‘rule of law’ in two ways, both equally destructive in the long term. For the (mostly Leftist/fascist) idiots who do this stuff, it fosters a very arrogant, cynical view that ‘the law is what we say it is’ – which literally means there IS no law, just the whim of the day.

          For those of us who actually DO value the Constitution, and individual liberty, it is easy to become both cynical and non-compliant. “If they’re going to keep passing stupid, idiotic, unconstitutional, anti-freedom laws, it’s not worth my time to fight them. I’ll simply ignore their idiot laws.”

          I submit BOTH mindsets are corrosive to a civil society.

          But if they are going to continue passing BLATANTLY unconstitutional laws? I’m going to keep ignoring them. Did I register my “assault weapon” when CA required it? F*** no, and I don’t intend to. Did I get rid of all of my 10+ round mags? F*** no, and I don’t intend to. Will I comply with a ‘manadatory buyback’? F*** no. And it bothers me that this is even an issue, but . . . don’t start none, won’t be none. But if they insist on going down this road? FAFO.

        • With a 51/49 majority in the Senate, they are one vote away in the Senate from being ready to pack the court. Manchin and Sinema were the only no votes.

          If they get to 52 and retake the House in 2024, it will be a done deal.

    • “There is no downside to enacting unconstitutional laws.”

      There would be if we ever get control of the ballot boxes.

      • “There would be if we ever get control of the ballot boxes.”

        How would that be? Haven’t the non-Dim/Leftist crowd had control of the ballot boxes in the past? Successfully electing majorities, installing them, and then…..?

  7. This is politics 101. He’s telling them what they want to hear. He has to lie to his audience or his career would be dead.

    • Doesn’t Connecticut have some interesting 2nd amendment related cases pending at the moment?

  8. Sure is correct! A sea change is happening due to all the Mass Shootings. We Must Completely Wipe Out Gun Free Zones as the only thing they do is make it safer for the criminal to act. The shooter can count on No Return Fire from the Disarmed Lawful citizens.

  9. A law is only as good as its enforcement. Watch Illinois closely in the next couple of months. They’ve defunded the PD, reformed/eliminated bail, and turned countless criminals back out on the street. In january, after they pass a bunch of new unconstitutional gun laws, they’re going to lose their minds when they find there are no cops willing to enforce the new laws/harrass lawful gun owners.

    • NYC and much of New York state has had a wild time with these policies. Chicago beats out pretty much everything here besides Rochester per capita and by sheer numbers at it’s starting point. Buy armor and ammo if you are in the spill zone as they may try to take those from you next.

  11. “…brink of a sea change”.

    I think that is misspelled. Should be ‘see change’. Assh*le Murphy doesn’t ‘see’ the change that is happening with regard to gun rights. This will be better when we see a ‘change’ in leaders that don’t follow the law.

  12. My idea of “gun control”. If you are charged with using a gun committing a crime, there are no plea deals. If you are convicted of said crime 25 year minimum mandatory no early release.

    Deal with the REAL issue, criminals! You would think there’d be a study out there that shows how many “gun deaths” a year were committed by people with no criminal history and I bet I know why.

    • clear out the jails and prisons from all those who are in there because they were caught with some plant material the government unilaterally decided was naughty. Next release ll those in there because of doing something deemed “a crime” but tat had no victim who was harmed. Folks who, say, happened to have a rifle with barrel one quarter of an inch shorter than what is deemed by our overlords to be “legal”, or who forgot to carry some arbitrarily mandated piece of paper when they also carried their handgun in a hip holster. Or maybe had odd pieces of metal or plastic that some other gummit poohbahs arbitrarily decided should be “prohibited”.

      That would leave sufficient space inside the prisons to put those oathbreakers whist they ponder the harm they have perpetrated upon those they reportedly “serve”.

  13. As I have said before both the Liberals and the Conservatives of the Supreme Court hate and fear guns because they are a threat to their dictatorial power over the people and the legislatures.

    People run for the Supreme Court because they crave absolute power over everyone and it would not be in their best interests to overturn assault rifle and magazine bans and they are no more going to do this than give away even a penny to needy people.

    Yes, it is true they threw gun owners a bone with Bruen that had to do with carrying a weapon and nothing to do with “restricting” the ownership of deadly weapons of mass destruction.

    The Supreme Court will do what it has always done and that is let the lower gun hating judges take the heat for upholding gun and magazine bans while they get off the hook by simply refusing to rule on the case.

    Right now the creditibly of the Supreme Court is at its lowest level in the history of the country by turning women into sex slaves by overturning a 50 year Constitutional Right to Privacy. To overturn gun bans would be the final nail in their coffin and they know it. They know if enough people turn against them they can and will be impeached.

    • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD Well, you have really done it this time. You have exhibited your infernal stupidity. First, no one “runs for the Supreme Court.” You are nominated; the nomination is forwarded to the US Senate where they either confirm or deny the APPOINTMENT.
      Second, the Supreme Court does not give any money to anyone. That is done by the US Treasury after Congress passes a budget authorizing any kind of payments to anyone.
      Third, no one is trying to possess or own a ‘deadly weapon of mass destruction.”
      Fourth the cases regarding “assault weapons” (there is still no such thing) would deal with STATE laws and are currently in the lower courts and have not even reach any of the appellate courts much less the Supreme Court.
      Fifth, the Supreme Court does not rule based on public opinion; the Court rules on the validity of the law based on the Constitution. There never was a “right to privacy” in the Constitution. And I don’t know of any woman who is a “sex slave.” There is still a law against rape. As to abortion, the Court relegated the matter to the STATES in accord with the 10th Amendment.
      Sixth, can you tell me where in the Constitution, the Constitution endorses “the right to privacy”? I’ve read that sacred document over and over and I sure can’t find it.
      seventh, Your “gun bans” just might be history and thrown out to the garbage heap where they belong. Semi-automatic rifles are NOT “weapons of war,” ‘assault weapons” or any of your other pet names for semi-automatic rifles.

    • That right to privacy was destroyed by background checks and the 4473. Things that you support, dacian the fascist.

      But you already knew that. Quit passing gas and come up with something valid for a change. As it is you’re just spouting gibberish.

  14. Consistent refrain: in states where the Demons Dems control the ballot counts, they have no regard for the voters. Folk are purchasing guns because of progressive policies, yet, because the Demons Dems control the ballot boxes it seems like they have popular support when, actually, they may not. Fake media and corrupt pollsters put a shine on the illusion.

  15. Sen. Murphy, boys and girls, exemplifies the essential difference between liberals and conservatives. The liberal worldview is based on misanthropic ideology and wishful thinking, while the conservative worldview is based on observation and objective reason.

    • Based on the picture of the senator at the onset of this article, it is not clear if he is bragging about what he has or what he just experienced, he appears to be the real deep throat!

    • Except that Liberals will stop at nothing. Not only to get their way, but to force everyone else to adopt it.

      Conservatives tend to be more about independence. We don’t have to agree on everything, but as long we each respect the same boundaries, all is good.

      Liberals don’t respect the boundaries. They cannot stand the thought of anyone not agreeing with them or complying to their demands.

  16. That picture of this idiot looks like one of the carnival clowns you shoot the water pistols at all he is missing is the balloon on top of his head.

  17. We don’t have guns in this country because of the gun lobby. We have them because the Second Amendment tells the government they can’t take them from us.

    The point in the gun lobby is to be a tool to use against all those that try to go against the US Constitution by acting unlawfully. Without that tool in place right now, the Democrat left would just ignore law and do whatever they like. So of course they have issues with the gun lobby. Most especially when they don’t get money from them.

    Too many people think the NRA makes laws. They don’t.

  18. the democrats still pushing big gun control
    are like the japanese that were dtill fighting americans on the remote and isolated islands
    months after world war 2 ended
    because they didnt know it was over

  19. He has the mass shooter thing all BASS ACKWARD. The guarantee of DEATH to a mass shooter as he starts his mayhem by an honest law-abiding gun carrying citizen will put the brakes on this trend.

    • Only if you assume that wanting to get through it alive is one of the murderer’s goals. Seeing how many wnd up killing themselves, deterrent effect would seem to be very limited.

  21. Typical lying, stinking, democrat that did not get his way. You know as an ex USMC I try to be Christian about the way I am with others but these people make you want just punch them right in the mouth.

  22. Murphy the prog couldn’t find is his own ass if he was locked in a phonebooth. Absolutely no reason to report on the idiot.

  23. dacian just commented on Senator Chris Murphy Whistles Past the Bruen Graveyard, Predicts ‘Victory After Victory’ for Gun Control.

    In response to Walter E Beverly III:

    dacian, the DUNDERHEAD Well, you have really done it this time. You have exhibited your infernal stupidity. First, no one “runs for the Supreme Court.” You are nominated; the nomination is forwarded to the US Senate where they either confirm or deny the APPOINTMENT. Second, the Supreme Court does not give any money to anyone. […]

    To Walter the Beverly Hillbilly

    quote————-the Supreme Court does not give any money to anyone.————quote

    Wrong. The Court rules on various laws that are passed as to whether or not they are Constitutional and the Conservatives vote to spend no money on needy people, and twist the Constitution to serve their greedy and stingy conservative philosophy.

    DUNDERHEAD, seems you have no clue what a court of law does, let alone the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has never issued a check to anyone except it’s employees.
    For your edification it is not the job of the Federal Government to feed anyone except our Armed Forces. It’s called personal responsibility. Show me where in the Constitution it provides for the Feds to feed ordinary citizens? you won’t be able to. It’s not there.

    quote————- First, no one “runs for the Supreme Court.” You are nominated; the nomination is forwarded to the US Senate where they either confirm or deny the APPOINTMENT.———-quote

    Wrong again Walter the Beverly Hillbilly. Although the candidates are not running to influence the American people they do indeed try to influence the President and the Congress to get themselves appointed to the court.

    DUNDERHEAD, so you admit you are/were wrong about people running for the Supreme Court. YAWN!

    Quote—————-There never was a “right to privacy” in the Constitution. And I don’t know of any woman who is a “sex slave.———-quote

    Wrong again Walter the Beverly Hillbilly

    The link gives you

    1.The 1st Amendment: Privacy of beliefs

    DUNDERHEAD, yep except that is not privacy.

    2.The 3rd Amendment: Privacy of the home against the use for housing soldiers

    DUNDERHEAD, we don’t quarter soldiers in people’s homes.

    3.The 3rd Amendment: Privacy of the home against the use for housing

    DUNDERHEAD, repeating yourself? We still don’t quarter soldiers in people’s homes.

    4. The 4th Amendment: Protection against unreasonable searches
    Similar to the above concerning privacy within the home, the Fourth Amendment states that no one can search possessions and property without good reason or a warrant.

    DUNDERHEAD, Yep, but that is a limited right which allows a court to issue a Search Warrant based on probable cause. What is your point?

    5. The 9th Amendment: Protection of rights not mentioned in the Constitution
    The Ninth Amendment states that,

    “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

    The idea is that certain rights are not covered that the government has no right to violate. This may be the most important when creating new laws to protect rights to privacy and personal beliefs.
    DUNDERHEAD, what “rights” are you referring?

    6. The Fourteenth Amendment is where the Constitution goes a little deeper into personal liberties. It says that,

    “no state should deprive any person of life, liberty, or property.”

    It clearly states that the people have certain freedoms that the state cannot remove. This allows for new laws that can help strengthen the sentiment and afford better protection.

    DUNDERHEAD, so you are saying that the Federal Govt nor the states can take out guns.

    7. The Right to Privacy Within Statutory Law
    There may not be any simple Constitutional article to use whenever there is an issue of privacy invasion, but the combined implications from the Constitution allow for clearer statutory laws.

    Over time, cases emerge where the rights of citizens are questioned concerning the aims or proposed laws from the government.

    DUNDERHEAD, No such rights exist. Thanks.

    Certain laws or proposals may be deemed unconstitutional or just ruled out based on how they inhibit the people’s freedoms

    8. Informational privacy in the 20th century
    Across the 20th century, we have seen cases like this that related to family law, health, marriage, and reproductive rights.

    Many citizens prefer to zealously guard their privacy.
    Some of those are still highly contentious today and pose similar questions about citizens’ rights to privacy and personal choice. Many of these relate to reproductive rights and the protection to do what we please with our bodies.

    DUNDERHEAD, The US does not recognize “international law” as binding on the American people unless agreed to by a treaty ratified by the Congress

    9. Reproductive Rights and the Right to Privacy

    DUNDERHEARD, no such right exists. See the Dobbs Decision.

    10, Personal privacy and HIPAA
    Furthermore, the privacy issue in medical situations and constitutional rights ties in with HIPAA – the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. This protects the confidentiality of patients regarding their medical history.

    A key factor in creating laws and rulings for the people’s privacy and personal data protection comes down to the idea of liberty more than privacy.

    DUNDERHEAD. Thanks. You have just torpedoed your claim that mentally ill people can be listed in NICS without a court order

    11. The Right to Privacy in an Online World
    The case-by-case approach of the Supreme Court for rulings on the people’s rights and protections makes sense because people’s needs evolve with time.

    Any amendment to the right to privacy created in the 1970s would have no provision for anything related to online privacy and digital personal data. There is always a need for updated privacy law and new acts to deal with new situations.

    DUNERHEAD, give us SCOTUS citations

    12. Data protection and individual privacy
    Data protection is a big issue as we see breaches from tech companies with personal information available online.

    For a more lengthy explanation to the above to to this link

    https://constitutionus.com/constitution/rights/the-right-to-privacy-in-the-constitution/

    Walter the Beverly Hillbilly, a Constitutional Scholar you are definitely not.

    None of these ‘so called rights” exist in the Constitution, DUNDERHEAD. Except as specifically enumerated in the Constitution

    • To Walter the Beverly Hillbilly

      You could have saved a lot of typing by just screaming “Do not confuse me with the facts and supreme court history as it does not fit my far right ideology. Your replies were laughable.

      I might briefly add you were grasping at straws as well as proving you are a disciple of Hitler himself when you claimed a woman or a man for that matter does not have the right to privacy with their own body. That is right out of Nazi ideology and par for the course for you jack booted storm troopers.

      • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, screaming the truth at you would do absolutely NO GOOD. Your facts are not facts at all. Have you ever heard of “fake news”?
        In the typical Leftist anti-gun style you attack me rather than what I have said. Could it be because you can’t come up with a reasonable coherent response(s)? You would not know a fact, if one came up and slapped your puss.
        Hitler and his cronies are more in line with you and your Leftist stormtroopers, ANTIFA and BLM thugs. I do believe I have pointed out to you previously that fascism and Nazism have their roots in Socialism? Did you forget again?

  24. @LampOfDiogenes
    “Still disagree.”

    Don’t see how; we are not talking about the same thing. There is no downside for people who propose and enact unconstitutional laws. What consequence/punishment do they incurr?

    And even if there were identifiable consequences/punishments, that is not a downside, but a badge of honor, marking them as myrtars useful for energizing the base of their politics.

    If there are no negative rewards, why should the lawless discontinue doing what they are doing?

    “Society”? Which “society”? The society of the “deplorables” is an existential threat to the society of the properly enlightened, and therefore a threat to “democracy” that must be crushed by any means necessary.

    “Circling back”, there is no real downside for people intent on enacting unconstitutional laws (doing so isn’t a crime). Haven’t seen anyone voting to pass unconstitutional laws actually pay a fine, or spend a day in jail.

  26. Even here in Oregon, Measure 114 seemed like a God send to gun control zealots but it fails to address two big loop holes. 80% percent receivers are not guns and can be completed at home in about 30 minutes and assembled in to those “Scary black rifles” without serial numbers (a legal federal activity as long as the gun is for yourself). Measure 114 also doesn’t address polymer resin receivers. I buy the poly resin (not a gun) mix it with a hardener and pour the mixture into a mold and wait for it to cure. Voila, AR15 receiver.

  29. This supposedly intelligent individuals keep using Bloomberg’s Everytown for their supposed evidence. What they fail to mention is that the states with ‘weak’ (whatever that may be} gun laws are also states with the most liberal governments at the city level and it is those liberal cities that are driving up the crime rate for those states. But that is an inconvenient truth that they don’t want to hear.

Comments are closed.