Video: Dem rep sponsoring gun-control bill seems to think that … magazines can’t be reloaded

posted at 4:01 pm on April 3, 2013 by Allahpundit

Lest you think the bit in the video is taken out of context, the Denver Post — which sponsored the forum — has its own item up marveling at the ignorance here. DeGette’s logic: If you stop new high-capacity magazines from being manufactured, eventually all of the bullets in America’s remaining inventory of HCMs will be fired and then poof — that’s the end of high-capacity magazines. If only Bloomberg had thought of that vis-a-vis his soda ban. Want to stop people from drinking more than 16 ounces of soda? Simple. Just ban the manufacture of new 16-ounce cups and let nature degrade the remaining supply. Then no one will drink more than 16 ounces ever again.

Follow the link to the Post’s item for her spokesman’s spin, then watch the vid. Supposedly she means “clips” instead of “magazines,” but either way she seems to think the supply of bullets is limited by the existing supply of feeding mechanisms. Imagine her surprise when she finds out about 3-D printing.

While we’re on the subject, do note that Jim Carrey doesn’t want to take all of your guns away, even though you’re “heartless motherf***ers.” He only wants to take some of them away, arbitrarily. Exit quotation: “For those who say I’m a hypocrite because I have an armed bodyguard, lets make one thing clear: No one in my employ is allowed to carry a large magazine…”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

It’s going to be even more amusing to watch this dingbat try to walk this back or gloss it over after someone clues her in on how badly she stepped in it.

CurtZHP on April 3, 2013 at 8:42 PM

the bigger question is IF YOU HAD HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES ON THE ISLAND OF GUAM, WOULD IT CAUSE IT TO TIP OVER?

yes, these are the folks who are smarter than us and govern us…..

SDarchitect on April 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM

yes, these are the folks who are smarter than us and govern us…..

SDarchitect on April 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM

Two things rise to the top.

Cream.

and

Scum.

ajacksonian on April 3, 2013 at 8:49 PM

Annnnd … she gets to vote on your future.

Idiotic donks will vote for anyone that will vote the party line.

hawkdriver on April 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

One of the things that really bug me about politicians desire to ban high capacity magazines is that even rifle with a 10 round fixed magazine can be reloaded in about 2 seconds from a 10 round clip. You don’t even need removable magazines to do that. And you can put a pile of those 10 round clips in a cargo pants pocket. Maybe the next ban will be to ban large pockets.

Dasher on April 3, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Your remedy – arming school principals – is (sorry) absurd.
But maybe you just haven’t really thought it through much yet.

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:25 PM

What, specifically, is absurd about training and allowing teachers and administrators to concealed carry?

No snark, please be specific.

Tomblvd on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Annnnd … she gets to vote on your future.

Idiotic donks will vote for anyone that will vote the party line.

hawkdriver on April 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

As a Kalifornian I may not have to hang my head in shame much longer.

antipc on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

In attempting to get DeGette off the hook, her office issued the following statement:

“The congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,” Johnson said.

Most clips can be re-loaded too.

bw222 on April 3, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Check this out-her comments about magazines is not her only moronic, disrespectful statement in the last day or so. This really shows that she is dumber than a rock and should be recalled – voted out! It makes me ill to think we pay this P O S!

Outrageous!… Dem Rep. Degette Mocks Senior Citizen – Says “You’d Probably Be Dead Anyway” if Confronted by Armed Criminals
“>http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/04/outrageous-dem-rep-degette-mocks-denver-senior-says-youd-probably-be-dead-anyway-if-confronted-by-armed-criminals-video/

Lew in Colorado on April 3, 2013 at 9:17 PM

Strong with this one, the stupid is…

RedMindBlueState on April 3, 2013 at 9:26 PM

What, specifically, is absurd about training and allowing teachers and administrators to concealed carry?

No snark, please be specific.

Tomblvd on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Look, even cops, who are specifically trained and paid to carry weapons to maintain order, can have problems performing in a crisis-as was seen in the recent debacle in NYC where apparently all the bystanders were wounded by police fire rather than criminal fire.

Teachers and principals have heavy responsibilities which are very time consuming. Many of them have no interest in firearms. Given that some child may need an emergency appendectomy some day should we also expect them to perform as surgeons?

If you want schools to have armed guards, hire them, don’t try to cross train people without interest, aptitude or time for a skill this critical.

Given that a lot of these people can’t even teach, as shown by the recent widespread cheating scandal in Atlanta, do you seriously want them carrying weapons around a lot of kids?

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

If you want schools to have armed guards, hire them, don’t try to cross train people without interest, aptitude or time for a skill this critical.

Given that a lot of these people can’t even teach, as shown by the recent widespread cheating scandal in Atlanta, do you seriously want them carrying weapons around a lot of kids?

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

1. Many of them ARE interested.

2. How critical is it? One end of the gun points toward the evildoer, the other end is in your hand. Pull the trigger, rinse and repeat until the evildoer stops doing evil.

3. Don’t pooh-pooh a suggestion without providing a better one.

fossten on April 3, 2013 at 9:47 PM

I’m sick to death of these sneering, preening, sub-moronic do-gooding ‘betters’. I can’t say what I’m hoping happens to them, soon.

Midas on April 3, 2013 at 9:53 PM

If you want schools to have armed guards, hire them, don’t try to cross train people without interest, aptitude or time for a skill this critical.

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Where does Tom suggest to train teachers “without interest?” I do believe the word “allow” suggests it would be voluntary not compulsory

What, specifically, is absurd about training and allowing teachers and administrators to concealed carry?

No snark, please be specific.

Tomblvd on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Conservative4Ever on April 3, 2013 at 9:54 PM

From the last time you used those same talking points:
 

It’s very difficult to be 100% vigilant all the time. If you’re talking about teachers carrying loaded handguns while constantly mingling with young rambunctious children, you will increase accidental shootings. Armed police don’t spend their days playing with children, sitting in story circles, etc. Even police occasionally have accidental shootings and they devote many hours to weapons training. It is unreasonable to expect that level of weapons training of teachers.
 
talkingpoints on December 16, 2012 at 6:11 AM

 
That’s a lot of talkingpoints to be so easily countered:
 
http://www.costco.com/Honeywell-Steel-Security-1.0-cu.ft.-Laptop-Safe.product.11649275.html

 
rogerb on December 16, 2012 at 8:39 AM

 
You’re imagining the argument to suit your talking points, btw.
 
Tomblvd didn’t say “ARM ALL THE INCOMPETENT TEACHERS!”. He asked why employees who are already licensed for concealed carry shouldn’t be allowed to.
 
Heck, they can’t even have their firearm locked in the glove compartment of their locked Camry these days. Let’s start there…

rogerb on April 3, 2013 at 9:54 PM

And because it’s so rarely set up to make the point so well:
 

…Given that some child may need an emergency appendectomy some day should we also expect them to perform as surgeons?
 
talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

 
If a teacher knew how to use a fire extinguisher you’d expect her to act in an emergency, right?
 
If a teacher knew CPR you’d expect her to act in an emergency, right?
 
If a teacher knew the Heimlich Maneuver you’d expect her to act in an emergency, right?
 
If a teacher knew…

rogerb on April 3, 2013 at 10:08 PM

If you can’t recite the cycle of operations for the weapon you’re talking about you shouldn’t get a seat at the table on the subject. Even then, once you say something like this – your membership is revoked. “I meant to say clips.” FYNQ

blankminde on April 3, 2013 at 10:09 PM

Given that a lot of these people can’t even teach, as shown by the recent widespread cheating scandal in Atlanta, do you seriously want them carrying weapons around a lot of kids?

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Wow what a dishonest quote. Are you that weak minded?

I think you’re an imposter.

CW on April 3, 2013 at 10:14 PM

Thanks for the belly laugh.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on April 3, 2013 at 10:46 PM

This is either an ignorant woman or someone who just gave us a tell. “Because there won’t be any more” could very well mean the statists are thinking long term and have no problem banning smaller and smaller clips throughout the years until finally “there won’t be any more”

uskorea on April 3, 2013 at 10:47 PM

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Thanks for stereotyping teachers. Not only are we incompetent, but so addled as to be untrustworthy making good decisions when carrying a concealed firearm. Nice to see that you are so open minded and fair.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on April 3, 2013 at 10:53 PM

I was most amused by the crowd’s reaction when this cupid stunt made it clear she thought that “high capacity” magazines were disposible things you picked up in 24 packs at the local Sams Club or something.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 10:56 PM

Thanks for stereotyping teachers. Not only are we incompetent, but so addled as to be untrustworthy making good decisions when carrying a concealed firearm. Nice to see that you are so open minded and fair.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on April 3, 2013 at 10:53 PM

Bit sensitive, aren’t you?

I’m not a big fan of arming teachers. Most of them are the touchy-feely types who would never be able to actually shoot for effect.

Where I do find fault with teachers, their union masters, and administrators (who are nothing more than incompetent teachers kicked upstairs) is that they utterly dismiss the concept of armed security in the schools. As if letting unhinged people like the Sandy Hook shooter know where there are not guns makes one lick of sense.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 11:02 PM

uskorea on April 3, 2013 at 10:47 PM

Sorry, this is not a tell. She believes that magazines and or clips are consumables. To her, they are the same a ammo once shot it is gone. Perhaps she thinks that the mags are sold with the ammo sealed inside. Love it when and idiot proves it by opening their mouth.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on April 3, 2013 at 11:03 PM

To her, they are the same a ammo once shot it is gone. Perhaps she thinks that the mags are sold with the ammo sealed inside. Love it when and idiot proves it by opening their mouth.

InTheBellyoftheBeast on April 3, 2013 at 11:03 PM

To her there is no difference between the packaging of ammo and the packaging of the pill. What shrinks could make out of that!

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 11:08 PM

O_O

If I had been at that table I would have stood up and ordered the sheriff to arrest the woman for being a danger to society. Good GAWD…I’ve heard dumb, I mean Joe Biden dumb…but this is at an entirely new level.

Bishop on April 3, 2013 at 4:14 PM

And if not outright arrested for criminal stupidity, at least picked up on suspicion of ignorance.

soundingboard on April 3, 2013 at 11:16 PM

What is her take on the stability of Guam?

tom daschle concerned on April 3, 2013 at 11:19 PM

I almost missed this. What is an “assault magazine”?

Bishop on April 3, 2013 at 4:40 PM

I dunno. But whatever it is,you can bet they think you don’t need one.

soundingboard on April 3, 2013 at 11:30 PM

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

I get what you’re saying about teachers – to a large degree.
But there are even teachers who might actually be able to learn multiple skills.
And the teachers at Shady hook showed incredible bravery and self-sacrifice in trying to protect their students – but they were NOT armed and therefore only able to die before their kids were killed.
An armed teacher could have actually saved lives – instead of just sacrificing their own in a futile effort.
My wife is a librarian, and yet she appears to be very capable in handling a gun and hitting the target she’s shooting at. And she would very much like to have the opportunity to have something for self-defense if someone should ever attack her library. – and not just die as another defenseless victim in a gun free zone.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2013 at 11:35 PM

What is her take on the stability of Guam?

tom daschle concerned on April 3, 2013 at 11:19 PM

Perhaps that matter is more along the lines of her, uh, competence.

Kenosha Kid on April 3, 2013 at 11:36 PM

Circus Carney…

“As you know, and as everyone who is an expert on this issue can attest, there is not a single thing that the President has proposed that would take a single firearm away from a single law-abiding citizen in America,” Carney told reporters, according to a transcript provided by the White House. “This President supports our Second Amendment rights. The proposals he put forward — like banning military-style assault weapons, like limiting high-capacity ammunition clips — these are proposals that in no way infringe upon Second Amendment rights, and, again, would not take any firearm away from any law enforcement — law-abiding citizen.”

Got that? President Obama has not proposed a single thing that will take a single firearm away from a single law-abiding citizen in America…except for proposals like banning ‘military-style assault weapons and limiting high-capacity ammunition clips…none of which would infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of any law-abiding citizen.

Old & Busted: “If you like your plan, you can keep it…unless you cannot because it is one of those like major medical that is banned under Obamacare or is too expensive.”

New Hotness: “If you like your gun, you can keep it…you might not be able to get any ammunition for it, but, hey!, no one is infringing in the slightest on your Second Amendment rights! President Obama fully supports those rights and would NEVER take away or infringe upon them. Anyone, who believes otherwise, is just a conspiracy theorist. Plus, banning ‘military-style assault weapons’ doesn’t take a gun away from anyone, but if your current one breaks, sucks to be you!”

To quote SWalker: “o_O” …. eL3vEnTy!1!111!!!111

He added:

“When it comes to straw purchases — I mean, again, this is about enforcing the law. If you have individuals who are routinely buying weapons as straw purchasers on behalf of criminals who cannot buy weapons themselves because of their criminal record, that’s a violation of the law, and we ought to take action to ensure that the law is enforced. That seems like a very common-sense, conservative principle to me…”

Got that? We need NEW gun control laws to enforce the ones that already on the books even though:

1. Gun crime prosecutions under the Obama administration has decreased by 45% from the Bush administration; and,

2. Only 71 of the 71,000 people, who lied on their background checks in 2009, were prosecuted by the Obama administration; and,

3. In 2010, 72,142 were denied the right to buy a gun. 33,907 (47%) of those were denied because they lied about a felony indictment or conviction on their background check; yet, only 44 were prosecuted and 13 convicted of lying.

4. Even though people, who had been adjudicated mentally ill, are not allowed to own firearms under Federal law, 23 states and the District of Columbia had submitted fewer than 100 mental health records to the federal database, 17 states had submitted fewer than 10 mental health records, and 4 states had not submitted any.

5. As Vice-President Joe Biden said,

“We don’t have time to prosecute everybody who lies on background checks.”

6. Straw purchases are already illegal. Such laws did not prevent Columbine because they only apply retroactively, naturally.

Sooooo, let’s pass MORE gun control laws for the government NOT to enforce!

Without LibLogic®, life would be utterly boring…

“as does the idea that the background check system that already exists should be improved so that loopholes are closed that make sure that it does what it was intended to do, and that is ensure that those with criminal records and others who by law should not be allowed to, or are not allowed to purchase weapons cannot circumvent the law because of the loopholes in the system.”

This loophole argument is such BS.

1. There is no “gun show loophole,” per se. Most sales at gun shows are accompanied by a background check because authorised dealers MUST conduct them.

2. You CANNOT, legally, purchase a gun online without a background check. If you want to purchase a gun online, the sale will be done pursuant to a background check and you will have to pick up the weapon at a local, authorised gun dealer. Obviously, if Criminal A wants to sell a gun to Criminal B online, NO LAW IS GOING TO PREVENT THAT. NONE. By definition, criminals do NOT obey laws.

3. What the Feds really want is to mandate background checks for private, not dealer sales, which is akin to demanding you determine whether a buyer has liability insurance before you sell him your car. They want to prohibit the transfer of guns from family members to gifts, legacies, loans, etc. Theoretically, leaving your weapon at the home of your friend could result in the prosecution of the latter under the kinds of laws the Dems are demanding. Finally, they want a national registry. Well, we know how popular that is and where it leads.

Anyhoo, as Reagan would say, “Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” Nevertheless, I’m sticking with ignorant.

Jay, shut up, you ignorant slvt!

Resist We Much on April 3, 2013 at 11:36 PM

the bigger question is IF YOU HAD HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES ON THE ISLAND OF GUAM, WOULD IT CAUSE IT TO TIP OVER?

yes, these are the folks who are smarter than us and govern us…..

SDarchitect on April 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM

I guess that depends….now if you shoot into the ground will that cause the island to sink?

redguy on April 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM

I was most amused by the crowd’s reaction when this cupid stunt made it clear she thought that “high capacity” magazines were disposible things you picked up in 24 packs at the local Sams Club or something.

Happy Nomad on April 3, 2013 at 10:56 PM

That’s kinda like – how many times can you re-use a tampon?

redguy on April 3, 2013 at 11:42 PM

Master has spoken.

She runs our lives and she’s utterly clueless.

Mojave Mark on April 3, 2013 at 11:49 PM

Mojave Mark on April 3, 2013 at 11:49 PM

Heard on the radio this morning that 10% of Voters believe “Lizard People” secretly control the government.

And we thought they were nuts.

Kenosha Kid on April 3, 2013 at 11:52 PM

Lucky for her the media is a spineless, gutless, mindless lickspittle pimp brigade for such staggeringly stupid imbeciles and the Zombie Estate will do everything possible to help these pithed frogs to gain and hold power …no matter how frikkin’ imbecilic these (God help us!)legislators are.

And the voters (proof: Obama, 2nd term) and more mindless than the minus I.Q. morons they elect.

profitsbeard on April 4, 2013 at 12:32 AM

Magazines are something you read, and clips keep your hair out of you face…right? /Dem rep

bitsy on April 4, 2013 at 12:34 AM

Magazines are something you read, and clips keep your hair out of you face…right? /Dem rep

bitsy on April 4, 2013 at 12:34 AM

If you roll up a copy of Vanity Fair to swat a fly it then becomes and assault weapon!

profitsbeard on April 4, 2013 at 12:38 AM

Exit quotation: “For those who say I’m a hypocrite because I have an armed bodyguard, lets make one thing clear: No one in my employ is allowed to carry a large magazine…”

Wink wink.

unclesmrgol on April 4, 2013 at 1:09 AM

I was in my house in North Carolina. It was fall. I heard someone walking on the leaves. And somebody actually turned the knob. So I said, “Stand four feet back because I’m going to shoot now!” Boom! Boom!

Maya must have learned her shooting skills at the Joe Biden Shooting Academy. Point a shotgun at a door, without knowing really who is on the other side, just begin shooting. Could have been a family member. Unbelievable and irresponsible.

TulsAmerican on April 4, 2013 at 1:32 AM

Your remedy – arming school principals – is (sorry) absurd.
But maybe you just haven’t really thought it through much yet.

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:25 PM

Not just a fool, an ignorant fool…

In wake of the Newtown tragedy, 1,300 Ohio teachers signed up to learn tactical maneuvers, so they could help take down a school gunman if necessary.

But maybe you’re missing something. That’s obviously out of context, right?

Here’s a more complete look at it, with links to info, the newscast and “thank you” letters from the teachers who attended the training.

Maybe it’s YOUR thought that is absurd…

dominigan on April 4, 2013 at 2:01 AM

If you want schools to have armed guards, hire them, don’t try to cross train people without interest, aptitude or time for a skill this critical.

talkingpoints on April 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Good to see your arguments trashed, and your ignorance exposed, so quickly. Check my above links for proof you need some critical thinking lessons before post to any more blogs. You obviously don’t have the interest, aptitude or time for a skill this critical.

dominigan on April 4, 2013 at 2:08 AM

Next thing someone will be calling a shotgun a rifle.

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:11 PM

No. Next thing will be hoplophobes calling scoped hunting rifles, sniper weapons. Similar to arms used on the battlefield!

And then they’ll discover that two rounds of 3 inch, 12 Ga 00 buck fired from Ol’ Joe’s double barrel launches an AR mags worth of projectiles down range.

People like you will declare them to be worse even than the dreaded Bushmaster High Ammoclip
AAKK1467 Assault Mag Weapon ShotRifle. “Referred to by some as ‘The Baby Blaster’.”

People like you will use a coterie of buzzwords, purposefully designed to obfuscate the facts and deceive people.

Then, when called on your mendacity. When your cruelly cynical ploy to keep American citizens ignorant during a crucially important public policy debate is exposed, you attempt to distract from that exposure by implying that nomenclature confusion is merely an accident. And not that big of a deal.

When legislation is being drafted precise definitions are an imperative.

We’re on to your game plan. We will refuse to let its implementation become a Fait Acclompli

soundingboard on April 4, 2013 at 2:08 AM

“We learned, the way that no other parents should learn, that the most dangerous, dangerous part of an assault weapon is the magazine,” Nicole Hockley, whose son Dylan, 6, was killed Dec. 14, said at a press conference with other parents at the Capitol Monday morning.
“The horrible, brutal truth is that 154 bullets were fired in four minutes, killing our children, our daughters, our wives. The shooter carried 10, 30-round large-capacity magazines,” Hockley said. “We have learned that in the time it took him to reload in one of the classrooms, 11 children were able to escape. We ask ourselves every day — every minute — if those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, would our children be alive today?

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Ignorance of critical thinking is contagious. A smarter comment would be….

We ask ourselves every day — every minute — if those un-Constitutional “no gun zones” were not there to advertise our children as targets, and teachers not denied the ability to defend themselves and their students, would our children be alive today?”

dominigan on April 4, 2013 at 2:16 AM

This article is a perfect example of how we end up with the gun laws we already have, combined with the laws that are being proposed.

We have legislatures that have ZERO understanding of guns, how they work, how they are purchased, and what it takes to train in proper use. There are also plenty of anti-gun advocates who are in the same boat. The bottom line, in their eyes, is guns are scary and no one should have them.

Sadly, the world is more complicated.

I’m shocked, frankly, that teachers are not more receptive to the aspect of being able to have a firearm in the classroom. In my case, my place of employment prevents me from having a firearm while in the office which means I am forced to choose between being a victim or risking my career by carrying a weapon against company policy. Even if I was to use a weapon in self defense, I would be guaranteed to lose my job and risk my co-workers suing me in civil court for emotional distress.

Teachers would be given the freedom to have access to a weapon in their classroom and probably have the state pay for all their training. Talk about a slam dunk. Considering the average police response time in the country is 20 minutes, I would rather have the means to defend myself at work than cowering under my desk praying I don’t get shot.

All these straw man arguments are flying around that would never apply in the real world. Teachers would not be forced into having a firearm in the classroom. The decision would be totally voluntary. Training and certification would be a requirement.

I really don’t how much much more clear anyone can be to the anti-gun liberals in this country. The job of the police is not to protect you. The Supreme Court said as much, and any local police officer will tell you the same thing. Given this FACT, unless you can afford a 24/7 body guard, how do you all plan to keep yourself and your family safe? Harsh language? Pepper spray? Martial Arts? I suppose that would all have made a real difference at Sandy Hook if all the kids simply told Adam to stop shooting their friends.

Your safety is your personal responsibility. Not the police, not the government, and not your neighbor. It is your responsibility.

Don’t worry, at some point criminals will run out of helpless victims to murder.

Flashwing on April 4, 2013 at 2:47 AM

We ask ourselves every day — every minute — if those magazines had held 10 rounds, forcing the shooter to reload at least six more times, would our children be alive today?”

I really sympathize with the loss these parents are feeling. I cannot imagine the pain of losing a child and being totally helpless to do anything about it.

That said, they are grasping onto false hopes that limiting magazine size would somehow have saved any children. You could force a shooter to hand load each round and it would make no difference in a room full of defenseless children and frightened teachers. Worse yet, the speed by which explosives, poison gas, knives, swords, axes, or blunt objects kills cannot be legislated since they need no reloading.

People have been killing each other since the dawn of history. If they can’t use guns, they will use something else. You need to ask yourself what is more important; giving people the means to protect themselves or being able to sleep at night thinking you saved just one life while condemning the rest of us to death?

Flashwing on April 4, 2013 at 2:55 AM

I just heard the clip where an elderly man what should he do if someone broke in to his house:

“The police would be there in minutes. You would probably be dead anyway.”

What a jerkette!

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Seems like this uninformed politician finally read this and if she hasn’t yet, she needs to. Complete with an awesome video of instructions:-)

http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/04/03/progressives-how-do-we-guns/

Awesome job dana!!! LOL

bluefox on April 4, 2013 at 8:58 AM

You’re remedy of trying to totally disarm society is pure idiocy. And your thoughts that disarming law-abiding citizens will somehow automatically disarm the criminals who don’t obey the laws, is pure insanity.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2013 at 6:28 PM

That you view what’s on the table here as “trying to totally disarm society” is revealing.
What’s being proposed here is admittedly imperfect yet reasonable. And far far far from ‘disarming society’.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 9:29 AM

What, specifically, is absurd about training and allowing teachers and administrators to concealed carry?

No snark, please be specific.

Tomblvd on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Their profession and training is as educators. To somehow expect them to universally become adept at handling a firearm…especially when confronted by a Lanza type figure (heavily armed, gun obsessed and thus likely quite proficient in using them)…is more than a stretch – it’s just not possible.
And any examples you’d offer to the contrary are exceptions.
There is no perfect solution to this issue. But some are for sure more imperfect than others.
I’m sure many folks here have kids who are quite experienced in handling firearms…having received early training and are more experienced and responsible than many adults.
Why don’t you propose arming students as well.
And what about the lunch ladies? The school bus drivers? The crossing guards? The janitors?
In this fantasy land would a perp even stand a chance?
I don’t mean this as snark. I’m just trying to illustrate that of course you can conjure up some hypothetical scenario where some good citizen takes down a shooter the moment after they draw their weapon.
But it’s a fantasy. Few teachers want to be armed. And of those that do, few would be truly capable of proper and effective use – even following a week at some NRA gun camp.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM

You could force a shooter to hand load each round and it would make no difference in a room full of defenseless children and frightened teachers.

Flashwing on April 4, 2013 at 2:55 AM

You can’t seriously believe that?
You should read up on the timeline of the Gabby Giffords incident…and when that shooter was stopped.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 10:01 AM

What, specifically, is absurd about training and allowing teachers and administrators to concealed carry?

No snark, please be specific.

Tomblvd on April 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Most educators and admins at any school in America are leftists. Schools are totally nutted up about guns. I got a letter from my son’s school a few weeks ago informing me that they had arrested a nine year old boy for accidentally bringing a toy gun to school. He didn’t even point it or wave it at anyone. He simply gave it to the teacher and said he’d forgotten it was in his book bag. Imagine how such a group of fetishists would react to anyone but a cop carrying a real gun in the school.

EricW on April 4, 2013 at 10:14 AM

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Dude, you are so in over your head…..

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Your remedy – arming school principals – is (sorry) absurd.
But maybe you just haven’t really thought it through much yet.

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:25 PM

Here’s where perhaps you’ve not thought it through.

Pearl Vice-Principal stops shooter with gun from truck.

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Their profession and training is as educators. To somehow expect them to universally become adept at handling a firearm…especially when confronted by a Lanza type figure (heavily armed, gun obsessed and thus likely quite proficient in using them)…is more than a stretch – it’s just not possible.

You are (intentionally?) missing the point. The minute a school takes down the “Gun Free” sign and puts up a “Willing faculty and staff (yes, even janitors et.al.) have received firearm training from the NRA” sign, the place immediately is removed from the list as a possible target for an armed nutcase.

It really is that simple. Nobody even needs to be armed. Just the threat of an armed response is enough to deter violence.

I don’t mean this as snark. I’m just trying to illustrate that of course you can conjure up some hypothetical scenario where some good citizen takes down a shooter the moment after they draw their weapon.

That happens millions of times a year. Most of the time a gun is NEVER FIRED.

That leaves aside the innumerable times criminals just don’t bother because they know there’s a good chance they’ll get shot.

You really need to brush up on the concept of deterrence.

Tomblvd on April 4, 2013 at 10:38 AM

Here’s where perhaps you’ve not thought it through.

Pearl Vice-Principal stops shooter with gun from truck.

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Well played, spidey, I forgot all about that one.

Tomblvd on April 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM

That you view what’s on the table here as “trying to totally disarm society” is revealing.
What’s being proposed here is admittedly imperfect yet reasonable. And far far far from ‘disarming society’.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 9:29 AM

I understand you’ve entirely bought the socialist Dem talking points, but you really should start trying to think for yourself.
Several Dems have stated publicly that the ultimate goal is in fact to disarm the people of this country. The fact that you are unable to connect the dots between what they’ve previously done and attempted, what they’re doing now, and what they’re aiming for is quite revealing about you.

What they are currently proposing is NOT reasonable at all. Just because you say so, doesn’t make it so. The laws they are proposing and passing, as in Colorado, are completely unenforceable – and the county sheriffs in Colorado have publicly stated as much. Your belief that they are enforceable shows your total lack of understanding about the subject, along with the Dems proposing these laws. These laws will NOT reduce crime, and even the Dems have admitted that. So how can you consider them “reasonable” when even the authors/sponsors have admitted they will not accomplish what the Dems claim they’re trying accomplish?
Plain and simple (so maybe you can get it) – these supposed “reasonable” laws will not reduce crime and are unenforceable without total gun and magazine registration – which in all of human history has ALWAYS led to total weapon confiscation – so what is their real purpose?
What part of this equation do you still not understand?

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 10:55 AM

I understand you’ve entirely bought the socialist Dem talking points…

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Oh, ok.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Their profession and training is as educators……, blah, blah, additional drivel….
verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Well you really are showing a typical socialist low expectation union mentality.
Ever heard of “troops to teachers”?
Do you really believe teachers, who might actually have had some other profession prior to becoming a teacher, are incapable of learning multiple skills?
Do you think teachers also cannot possibily learn how to cook or drive or fly planes or fix cars or anything else?
Why on earth would you want such stupid unskilled people teaching our kids?
Do you believe that all hunters in this country are only professional hunters and have no other skills?
I know a lot of people who are not cops, who can shoot better than most cops. Shooting, and even tactical shooting is not a skill reserved solely to the police – in fact millions of people are quite good at it – many of them also happen to be teachers.

Wow – you really are a complete moron aren’t you?
Does your mommy do everything for you, because I get the impression that you must be incapable of learning multiple skills, since you believe the same of everyone else.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 11:08 AM

You can’t seriously believe that?
You should read up on the timeline of the Gabby Giffords incident…and when that shooter was stopped.

verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Given that incident occurred at a Dem pep rally, I’m not surprised there was nobody in the crowd with a CCW to shoot back, or the guts to go after him before he stopped to reload.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Most educators and admins at any school in America are leftists. Schools are totally nutted up about guns. I got a letter from my son’s school a few weeks ago informing me that they had arrested a nine year old boy for accidentally bringing a toy gun to school. He didn’t even point it or wave it at anyone. He simply gave it to the teacher and said he’d forgotten it was in his book bag. Imagine how such a group of fetishists would react to anyone but a cop carrying a real gun in the school.

EricW on April 4, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Of course there are a lot of those across the country.
However, there are also lots of schools, mostly in flyover country, where administrators and teachers don’t go off the deep end like that. And there are many schools already where they are in fact cancelling the gun free zone and allowing emploees to be trained with handguns. The education field may be mostly left-wing nuts, but not entirely – and it’s VERY dependent on where the school is.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM

A Daily Kooks Writer Argues: Why Liberals Should Love The Second Amendment??? You Betcha!

M2RB: Kay Kyser

It’s a miracle! We, finally, agree!! Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!!!

“That is our obligation as citizens, to protect against the government infringing upon our rights by making full use of them…And yet, when it comes to the Second Amendment, liberals do not fight to protect that right. Instead them demand more laws. Regulate, regulate, regulate — until the Second Amendment is nearly regulated out of existence because no one needs to have a gun anyway.”

“And the Second Amendment is no different. It is not about how much ammunition is “excessive” or what types of guns are and are not permissible. Liberals cling to such minutia at the expense of understanding and appreciating the larger concept that underlies this right.”

“This is an appeal to liberals, not merely to tolerate the Second Amendment, but to embrace it. To love it and defend it and guard it as carefully as you do all the others. Because we are liberals. AND FIGHTING FOR OUR RIGHTS — FOR ALL OF OUR RIGHTS, FOR ALL PEOPLE — IS WHAT WE DO.”

Resist We Much on April 4, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Events like this happen every day/night across the country.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/04/wash-grandmother-holds-suspected-burglar-at-gunpoint-until-police-arrive/?test=latestnews

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 11:22 AM

She’s confused. She thought magazines just held lots of words.

Mahdi on April 4, 2013 at 11:23 AM

This woman, and others like her, are dumber than a box of HAIR!

I read her statement to my son, who is a trained and certified gunsmith, and he could not even think of anything to say at first… And he’s never rendered speechless.

As Bugs Bunny would say, “What a MAROON!!”

HilliardPatriot on April 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Priceless! Ya just can’t make up this stuff.
If there are any Americans dumber than Leftists, they’re hidden.
Probably “living in a van down by the river”.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on April 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM

She’s confused. She thought magazines just held lots of words.

Mahdi on April 4, 2013 at 11:23 AM

I just get them for the pictures….
;)

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Old/busted:
 

Sure.. That happened…then.
Glad that’s how that particular one turned out…
 
verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:22 PM

 
New 16 hour later hotness:
 

You should read up on the timeline of the Gabby Giffords incident…and when that shooter was stopped.
 
verbaluce on April 4, 2013 at 10:01 AM

rogerb on April 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Have you ever heard that armed female volunteer’s thoughts on arming teachers etc.?

verbaluce on April 3, 2013 at 6:22 PM

Jeanne Assam is a hero. And she gets all the credit in the world for saving what could have been dozens of victims. That said, her worldview is, to say the least, a bit skewed:

We need to put stricter security measures in place, like they do at airports. People are being incredibly naive if they think that is too extreme. We need these strict measures to be in place at the entrances of all malls, sports arenas, concert venues, etc., because those targets are next. We need armed security/police to “man” the entrances/exits. This may be an inconvenience, but it is quite necessary. How many more mall shootings, for example, must occur before we see the logic in this?

TSA style security to go to the mall????????

No thank you Jeanne.

Tomblvd on April 4, 2013 at 12:55 PM

A clown show. It would be funny if this thing wasn’t part of the ruling elite.

We deserve everything we get when we elect this type of vermin.

acyl72 on April 4, 2013 at 2:15 PM

O/T

Obama: Newtown Shooter Gunned Down 20 Children With ‘Fully Automatic Weapon’

Who wants to ratify my proposed 28th Amendment, also to be known as “The ‘So Stupid It Makes My Hair Hurt’ Amendment”?

No member of the Federal government may opine or draft legislation on a subject on which s/he cannot pass a basic competency test on the fundamentals of the issues involved provided by the Congressional Research Service, Government Accountability Office and independent organisations. To the extent that this amendment conflicts with the First Amendment, this article shall control.

Did you know that collapsible stocks make guns “fully-automatic”? According to DiFi, they do…

“These are weapons that are made to kill large numbers of people in close combat, and what we have found that now with the AR 15, they have a slide stock which you put in. It’s legal, and it makes the gun act fully automatic.”

- Senator Dianne Feinstein, Face the Nation, 27 January 2013

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now, they’re going to shoot them. So if you ban them in the future, the number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time, because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

- Representative Diana DeGette (D-CO), lead sponsor of legislation banning high-capacity magazines

The stupid is strong with this one.

“The congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”

- Congresswoman DeGette’s spokeswoman, Juliet Johnson, who wanted to make sure that, if you missed the stupidity of her boss the first time, you wouldn’t a second and would get the added ‘feature’ of knowing that her office spreads the stupid around for the purposes of fairness.

Er, yes, they can.

These people are just too stupid to be writing laws telling the rest of us what we can do. Go ‘tip-over and capsize’ Guam, idjits.

Resist We Much on April 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM

I hate these people, I really do hate them.

JackM on April 4, 2013 at 2:31 PM

If we ban liberals, then the exsiting supply will eventually die off.

JackM on April 4, 2013 at 2:32 PM

Gun violence aside. Anyone who cares about their children’s education and welfare would not send their kids to public schools at all if they can afford a private school.

Public schools have changed a lot over the years and not for the better.

Dasher on April 4, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Verbaluce is it? Et Al …

I know one teacher that is Double Distinquished and another that is “silver” in LEG points (Pistol).

If you (et al) don’t know what this means then you don’t know shiite about competitive shooting. Which leads me to believe with certainty, that you don’t know shiite about shooting AT ALL!
The teacher that I know, will damn certain X-ring any azzhole that trys any sort of shooting at any school the’re working.

Against the law you say? I believe was Disraeli who said it most effectively: “The law sir, is an ass.”
Gun Free Zones are frivilous, nonsense that only offer feel good STUPIDITY.

Missilengr on April 4, 2013 at 9:02 PM

She’s confused. She thought magazines just held lots of words.

Mahdi on April 4, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Thread WINNER!

Missilengr on April 4, 2013 at 9:04 PM

“The congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”

Oh, ok. For a minute there, I though the congresswoman was a dope.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:30 AM

The people of Colorado are to blame for this.

They now need to tell us what they are going to do to fix it.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:32 AM

Strong with this one, the stupid is…

RedMindBlueState on April 3, 2013

I wish I thought up this one.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:35 AM

Ok, this broad as used her brain to utter a thought.

Time for a new brain.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:40 AM

This lady is a joke. Needs to go next year.

Amazingoly on April 5, 2013 at 9:00 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3