Connecticut ban on guns
 

Connecticut has banned the sale of guns to people on the no-fly list (the federal terrorists list). I would have thought those people were already unable to buy guns, but apparently not.
The killer couple in California were not on anybody's list.

You would think that people on the no fly list would be banned from buying guns, but Congress thinks it is a stupid idea to ban those people from buying guns.

Congress has a 9 percent approval rating. Who are those 9 percent?

The killer couple had a friend - Enrique Marquez- who bought the assault design guns for them.

Part of the problem is there are many people in elected positions on the list that do not belong there. That is why this administration Obama , congress and the supreme court only give it lip service.

Why else would such an abvious action not be taken at the federallevel????

Exactly how would banning gun sales from the "no fly" list change anything? How many murders/mass murders have been perpetrated by anyone on the no fly list? And like someone else asked, wouldn't the fact that a person is on the list come up in the back ground check? What good is a background check if it doesn't do anything but register a new gun owner? Just some questions to think about. Personally, I believe this idea is just a show to cover up the fact that the gov can't locate and stop mass killers. Just an action to show that they are not just ignoring the issue. They just have no idea what to do, so they are just shooting in the dark hoping to hit something. Banning the no fly list from purchasing guns is tantamount to, or less effective than banning the mentally ill from gun purchase. Not all mentally ill are dangerous and not all no fly list subjects are dangerous. Not all mentally ill are documented and not all terrorists are on the no fly list. But, I guess this administration believes that any action is better than no action. Another inept idea that will achieve little if any results. Politics in action.

I hope your posting is read by someone in law enforcement because you sound like the poster boy for mental illness. YOU should not be allowed to own guns!

I felt obligated to show both quotes I will comment toward.
I agree with most of the first post. I would add that the politicians have a major problem when they call for more stringent gun laws. The problem? In the cities and states here in the USA with the most stringent gun laws they also have the highest gun crime and gun death rates. And I would add they will not take any laws of control that might be seen by special interest or minority groups or potential votes as an afront to their group or hurt their feelings (and I avoid using the detestable term politically correct!).

While entitled to your opinion, you already know your knee jerk response is nothing more than knee jerk disrespect of anothers opinions. You and yhose like you continue to demonstrate the complete lack of ability to respect any other opinions than those you support or agree with. As a result you are unable to carry on a cogent discussion. Resorting to restating what was said by another person, while being derogatory and disrespectful of others rights.

People's Republic offers theatre
 

Lets see. The complete leadership of the Democrat party thinks the keenest thing to prevent fanatical members of a religious cult from killing large numbers of citizens is to restrict people on a secret list put there by unknown officials for unknown reasons. This is it. This is the best they got. After this you can stand down because you are much more secure.

Look, I know these are not smart people but they are not this dumb. This is just more security theatre. You've seen it before. Shoe bomber means millions of people go barefoot in airports for 10 years, etc. This non serious proposal is designed to take advantage of a tragedy to push a long standing agenda.

It will be favored or viewed as a solution only by the Democrat leadership of various People's Republics, minions, hangers on, dupes and fools.

:agree:...totally. Liberals will embrace immigration of radicals into our country, but if someone is on the no-fly list, they should be denied the right to purchase a gun. Well, that would certainly stop the Boston bombing....or maybe not. Is it me, or does anyone else suspect that politicians are sampling a bit of the wacky weed, or snorting some of that white stuff?

Well, I've been handling guns for the last 45 years, yes military and law enforcement. By your writing, it appears that you fear guns, and that's totally OK. Folks that fear guns should not own them. However, it is also your type that call us in panic to protect their family, hoping that we get there in time. Hopefully, that neighbor of yours that owns that fearsome gun will not hold your liberal attitude against you and will get involved.....to protect your family in crisis. And hopefully, you won't be testifying against him in court when he has to use lethal force...to protect you and your family.

As far as your not agreeing with my comment, that is your prerogative. But, I am sure that anyone else in law enforcement that reads your comment will agree with me that you are probably not the ideal candidate for gun ownership. You would be wise and prudent to thank those that defend your freedom to comment in such a discourteous manner. I will also hazard a guess that you are too immature to apologize for your rudeness.

[QUOTE=Guest;1157223]

You would be wise and prudent to thank those that defend your freedom to comment in such a discourteous manner. QUOTE]


When was the last time that my freedom needed defending by someone fighting in America using a gun? Umm - never!

Do not go into past wars like Iraq, Grenada, Vietnam, or Korea. Those were not fought in America and also had nothing to do with defending my freedom - as well as they were fought outside of America.

I was not born yet during WWII and that was also fought by soldiers.

Police officers use guns but not to defend our freedom. I am all in favor of police having guns to protect us, soldiers having guns to protect us, and private gun ownership if someone wants one for protection or sport - but don't give me any crap about you being the saviour of the community.

[QUOTE=Guest;1157232]Thank you for confirming you are the generation that has not had to step up to the bar and face the adversities of a growing America in the past.

You must be in the age group that has no experience with a personal survival threat (you name it).

I will use a simple (I think!) example to further classify you. There are two (or more ) ways to fight fire.

One is to have the folks who sit in an expensive facility and have expensive equipment at the ready prepared to get to your house to put out a fire of save you from burning to death.
This mode would depend upon prevention to avoid being used ever.

The other is the person who will wait until they see the flames in their home (not next door or down the street or in the area) then decide what to do. If you are lucky and able you can always call those at the fire station to please get there as fast as possible to save your a$$ and your possessions.

So get down of your stupid horse of when was the last time the home land needed to be protected.

Do tyou have home owners and car insurance? Most likely yes. Now using your high horse approah, why?

In closing I will take the time to share a short story. I was in a seminar in Moscow and one of the speakers was a high ranking general. He said the world is safe as long as there is grey hair in command that knows and understands first hand what happens when they push the nuclear button.....death and destruction of millions of innocents. He said when the techies of today, like the drone pilots (no negative intents here) war is reduced to a video game mentallity. The same when it comes time to push the nuclear button. Nothing more than a game of who will be left with no investment in the results.

Wake up!

[QUOTE=Guest;1157232]This is an example of why your generation will lose all of this for the next generation....ignorance. Please do us all a favor and take a trip up to the VA clinic on Rt42 and repeat the above comment you made. Then, if you are still able, please come back and relate to us, what you may have learned. Or, better yet, stop in at the American Legion and make your statement. I know you won't, because that takes guts, and it is obvious by your comment, you have never had to rely on guts.

[QUOTE=Guest;1157314]You and I are probably the same generation. I was born in 1947 - WWIi was over in 1945.

I was in the Army - Sgt E5 - in Vietnam as RA, not US. I got a Purple Heart but not from heroism, just being a bit too far exposed from carelessness. Tell me how OUR freedom in America was saved by the action of America in a civil war. Same for Grenada or Iraq.

You and your John Wayne (a non-veteran) gun totin' buddies have not saved any freedoms in America. I am a member and enjoy the American Legion for social functions and friendships. As I said, I am not against anyone owning a gun legally, but don't say it has saved my freedom in America.

[QUOTE=Guest;1157326]Nice speech! Not to compare sizes, but I also served in Vietnam, twice. Also in Desert Storm and then later in Baghdad, Iraqi Freedom. Thank you for your service. Too bad you feel the way you do about your country, but the way I look at it, better to fight overseas than at home. If you don't believe the same way, then you were probably more damaged in combat than you realize. I don't consider myself a hero, but I have served my country for most of my life, in many different venues. Also not relevant to the thread. But, I am sorry that you don't feel that guns protect, or that guns gained us our freedom. Fighting overseas is to prevent the spread of oppression to our shores. Now, the left wishes to invite it into our country with open arms. They believe that they can talk sense to radicals. It doesn't work. They only respect power and force, and consider anything else as weakness.

Connecticut can do as they please, since the constitution gives them certain rights to make their individual state laws. Personally, I do not think that an impotent effort of banning those on the no-fly list from getting guns is going to do jack. It's all fluff, that will do nothing.

"Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, WAR has Never done much of anything good...