‘We’re coming for your guns,’ says Tallahassee columnist
 

http://www.examiner.com/article/we-r...ssee-columnist

Tallahassee Democrat journalist Gerald Ensley, wrote the
following in his column: “Stop the insanity. Ban guns.”
“I'm not talking about waiting periods and background checks,” he continued.
“I’m talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and assault rifles
by individual citizens. I’m talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
“We’re coming for your guns. And someday, we’ll take them...”

The whole country has been thinking about Ferguson for three months,
and the grand jury finally made the call based on the facts.
Michael Brown was not, as originally alleged, shot in the back, with his arms raised.

Yet, in an e-mail last night over the name of Cornell William Brooks, president and CEO of the NAACP,
he wrote about being “filled with frustration, disbelief, and anger…That the officer who shot and killed
an unarmed black man with his hands in the air remains free is appalling.”:facepalm:

What happened in Ferguson, and elsewhere that protests gave troublemakers an excuse to smash,
grab and burn, just might result in more gun sales. Over the past several weeks, gun sales in the
Ferguson and St. Louis region have skyrocketed. That can’t be comforting to Ensley or other gun prohibitionists.

I really hate that he wont be the one knocking on my door.......:hammer:

While the 2nd Amendment guarantees your right to bear arms, the 1st Amendment guarantees his right to lobby for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. You don't have to agree, but he has every right to say it.

While you are right can we take a guess that you dont own one either ??

I own a gun. In fact I own a handgun.

Nevada is right. No law against being an idiot either. :facepalm:

I knew you liked using your 1st amendment rights alot. Glad to see you like the 2nd tooooo.:D

Funny .....how you pick and choose which portions to
 

****************
"discuss" on an issue. I'm not disagreeing with his right to say it, although
he will have a tough row to hoe if he thinks he'll get it accomplished in his lifetime.....if ever.
What I find amusing is that you apparently disagree with his assessment that the 2nd DOES NOT
guarantee us the right to bear arms. Or do you also secretly agree, but choose not to at this point in time?

Apparently you didn't read that portion where he believes that former chief justice Burger
in an earlier interpretation of that Amendment, made a major mistake in recognizing it as
a right for the 'common' man. As I recall, he stated that it was, and I quote: “a fraud on the American public.”
He went on by referring to gun owners as “gun freaks.” He asserted, “Every legal opinion for 200 years denied
individual gun ownership was a right — until the steady lobbying of the National Rifle Association created a climate
that allowed a conservative U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 to strike down a handgun ban in the District of Columbia,
and fuel the sense of entitlement of gun owners.”

Just because he owns a gun . . . doesn't necessarily mean
 

************************************
that he likes the 2nd. You would presume too much to your sorrow.

(You also have no idea if he even knows which end the tiny little bullet comes out of.)

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.6080...=166&h=117&p=0
Picture of Nevada's handgun.



Remember that Pelosi and the rest of her like-minded ilk,
don't want the rest of us 'peons' to possess weaponry,
but have no problems being hypocritical by also carrying
or having hired 'thugs' guarding their worthless carcasses.

To be a true liberal, you must have a bit of hypocrisy or it fails.:ashamed:

I'm not sure what the answer is, but when over 30,000 Americans die each year from gun violence we should be looking for an answer.

Its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it !!!!!

Guess it's about time that the 'regressives' got behind the
 

***********************
the ball in having automobiles banned from the roadways then.....

The numbers are much higher than for gun accidents......

According to reports published by various sources, a low of 33,850 to
42,626 people are killed in VIOLENT and UNPREDICTABLE motor vehicle
accidents each year in the U.S. of A.

http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

Of course to suggest such (much less act upon) would be political suicide.
Not to mention, hypocritical, in that those who would ban them for the common folk,
would still be allowed the 'right' to be chauffeured around in their armored limos.

Although, if you stop to think about it, there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL
right to own and/or operate a motor vehicle upon the public roadway....

But for any liberal legislature to suggest such a possibility would likely get him SHOT!!!

Motor vehicles do society a lot more good than guns do. Nobody is going to argue that fire, police and ambulance vehicles are a good thing. It's also a good thing to be able to use a motor vehicle to get to work, or to get to thanksgiving dinner.

I won't give him my guns, but if he want to come to take it, I'll give him my ammo - one round at a time.

I could easily argue your first sentence . . .
 

*************************************
I don't recall that the early Pilgrims and settlers of this nation,
driving on down to their local Piggly-Wiggly or Winn Dixie store
to buy all the 'fixins' for their first Thanksgiving dinner.....

but then, you knew that already didn't you?

I'm sure that you meant to say......our "MODERN" society....right?

You don't think modern man has just as much (if not more) need to protect themselves from *(fill in the blank yourself.)

and much of the time they deserve it.

I'm sure all the criminals will hand over their guns when someone asks, very happily.

As for our guns, there was that boating accident...........................

In 2010, the Inspector General for DHHS said that more than 180,000 people (that's 6 times as many that died from gun violence) in MEDICARE died from medical mistakes. Shall we ban medical practitioners? What is the answer for this, the ACCA?

.

Apologies, I didn't read a single reply but just wanted to say: Clowns like this is EXACTLY why the general populous should be armed!

Wade

The answer to curbing medical mistakes is very different from curbing gun violence. For medical mistakes, Medicare forces providers pay for care for hospital acquired conditions. In other words, instead of being paid to care for their own mistakes, it comes out of their profits. We'll see how that policy changes those statistics.

I find eating helps people, some of the first prep items require the shooting of a gun.

:huh:

If they're dead, their medical care ain't costing anybody much..

I don't see how your statement ties to the valid statistic previously given.

How about the people committing these crimes pay a very hefty price. :hammer:

The idea is that they'll be more careful to not make medical mistakes. You don't think that will prevent people from dying from medical mistakes?

More people are sent to prison for longer sentences that any country on earth. In fact, about 25% of the world's prison population is in the USA. They pay a higher price for their crimes than anyone in the world. One thing's for sure, harsher punishments aren't working.

You've missed the point again. Doesn't matter, there's not a logical discussion that will suffice for you.

Yep, could see that one coming a mile away. :drum:

Interesting thing about conservative solutions, they seem to make logical sense but don't work. It's like trickle-down economics, it makes sense to you but never works. It's a continuing stream of logical fallacies.

* If more people have guns then gun violence will be curbed because criminals will be afraid everyone is armed.
* We can end teen pregnancy with ignorance because they'll never figure it out on their own (never mind that dogs figure it out).
* If we end welfare then we won't have any poor because they'll all go out and get jobs.

Why don't we get back on the topic of guns?

Not much to talk about Nevada. This clown is just another of Obama's " Al Sharpton" mouthpieces -stiring up trouble. Just ignore it.

A lot more people die on the highways, yet vehicles are still legal.

Even more die from lung mouth and throat cancer, but cigarettes are still legal.

Alcohol gets a ton of people killed, but the government still likes to sell it, and keeps it legal...

30K deaths from guns is a weak argument to outlaw them..

.............We would need fewer prisons if home owners used their guns more effectively on thiefs and murders ! If someone breaks down your door are you going to hide in the closet or use your pistol for the purpose for which it was designed ? , fordy

just one???????

So what you're saying is that we have a bunch of careless medical practitioners that really shouldn't be in the business? I'm sure that there a bunch of people in the medical field that would strongly disagree about cost being a factor in the deaths of so many people.

.

I had the same thought... I have a hard time in the mornings trying to decide which one I want to accessorize with for the day... :thumb:

This isn't my idea. LOL

This is part of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.

http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare...conditions.asp

This is Bush-era legislation, and only passed the senate with a tie-breaking vote by Dick Cheney.

"30,000 Americans die each year from gun violence" is rather misleading. Nearly two thirds of those deaths are suicide. Banning guns will not likely prevent suicide, as shown by Japan, which has a suicide rate roughly twice the United states. Alternate forms of suicide, such as walking in front of traffic or trains, or running a car in a enclosed space, is more likely to kill other people as well.

Maybe allowing suicide by drugs will reduce the "gun violence", but most people won't like that solution.

hmmm,ban guns? medical mistakes? hmmm,maybe my sil should have shot the 3 men she killed(2 husbands-her own dad)rather than poison them with antifreeze.better ban antifreeze............:facepalm::facepalm::facepal m::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepal m::facepalm:

Dude! They already did that! Well, not exactly. But they did take out the goody's so ya can't get rid of that useless neighbors dog so easy. Just saying!

Wade

It doesn't . . . but as you've probably noticed, it is the
 

*************************************
way that he normally handles 'difficult' questions......

He changes the subject and just keeps on going.

http://sytereitz.com/wp-content/uplo...izer-bunny.jpg

A lot of noise......which makes a few think that he's saying
something REALLY significant, but most of us know otherwise.