Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Weapons Ban: Hearings Should Have Been Held

January 16, 2013

Will the state Legislature’s assault weapon ban actually keep assault weapons from those who shouldn’t have them? It’s hard to say....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(44)

KCW007

Jan-19-13 3:14 PM

If the Nazi's had to consider that every Jewish papa might have been armed with even just a single shot shotgun, the storm troopers wouldn't have been near so eager to have gone about their awful business of knocking down doors and hauling people away to their doom. To be certain, no single man could have prevented what was going to happen to his family and himself, but the idea would be to take at least one, if not more, of the SOB's with him. Give their mother's something to cry about! The idea of attrition/harrasment comes into play too in such defenses. Think of how a German soldier would have felt about knocking down one door, while knowing that at any given moment another might fling open just down the hall. That's just the senario that a "well regulated militia" is all about. Win in the long run, meanwhile, make them pay a little here and a little there. Last one day longer than they can.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

alwaysright

Jan-17-13 6:08 PM

Am I proud of the Governor and president. Punish the responsible citizens, not the criminals. NOT one bit of legislation to punish the criminals caught with a weapon, NOT one bit of legislation to increase the sentence of these criminals. As usual these bans were politically motivated. Cuomo wants to be president and the president wants to be a dictator. Congratulations to the senate and house. Sheeple all of them.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FedUpL8ly

Jan-17-13 5:59 PM

boobybull, your opinions are so astonishingly devoid of common sense that I find it hard to fathom that you actually believe the nonsense in your comments. Say it ain't so, boobybull!

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-17-13 2:36 PM

seabisquit you are correct, that is the definition of a patriot. the people that call themselves patriots and then talk about overthrowing the government because they don't like the color of our presidents skin are the ones i am comparing to the taliban.

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Jan-17-13 1:54 PM

the "AR" in AR-15 stands for "assault rifle."

someone will NEVER be able to live down that statement. ignorance incarnate unmasked!!

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-17-13 1:04 PM

And seabisquit, i know you didn't mean to do it but your post "kinda hard to find someone guilty" is an acknowledgement that the right did NOT find either one of them guilty of anything. Those pesky facts though will never stop you from calling a horse a cow though.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MacKenzie

Jan-17-13 11:04 AM

Overdrive, there are not enough law enforcement to get to your house in time to stop an home invasion(unless by some stroke of luck, they are just around the corner). Law enforcement to citizen ratio is about 1:4000. They can't be in all places at all times. I, too, want law enforcement, et al, to be the ones to protect me, but sometimes they can't.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MacKenzie

Jan-17-13 10:57 AM

Really, bobby? And, calling others the who don't agree with you, which is almost everyone, the taliban because they exercise their Constitutional rights, is NOT bullying? You always go right for the jugular of your opinion opponents, denegrating them at the very first chance. But, then again, that has always been your modis operandi, no matter what your posting moniker has been.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-17-13 10:03 AM

overdrive, well thought out sane comments my friend. unlike the members of the american taliban on here.

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-17-13 10:02 AM

but lets use fast and furious as an example shall we. the mexican police and even the army were completely outgunned as the drug dealers had assault weapons hmmmmmmmmmm perhpas if they got rid of these weapons? nah

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-17-13 10:00 AM

And Seabisquit, please cite where Obama and Holder were found guilty of anything to do with fast and furious. if i remember correctly the republican fueled investigation came up with nothing on those gentlemen but hey, good old facts have never gotten in your way before have they

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FedUpL8ly

Jan-17-13 1:31 AM

Overdrive, how's this for a reason. Not everyone is an Annie Oakley, and in the privacy of one's home and confronted by several intruders, many a person, in a panicky state would need 10 rounds to give themselves a fighting chance. Then ask yourself why Obama would shut down the Govt Agency (NDIC) that kept track of the gang and drug related crimes that in many cases were perpetrated by those using assault weapons.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Overdrive

Jan-17-13 12:14 AM

MacKenzie, I trust the police, armed services, and the government to protect me, my family, and the Constitution much more than I do private citizens (including myself) acting alone or in independent groups. I guess I'm just patriotic that way.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MacKenzie

Jan-16-13 11:05 PM

These new laws go after legal gun owners and do nothing about the real problems. It is disgusting that our law makers insinuate that law-abiding citizens, who are legal gun owners are the same as the crazed murderers who have committed some of the most recent mass shootings. The legal gun owners have passed rigorous background checks. (How many of you anti-legal gun proponents could pass the background check?) None of these laws would have prevented those crimes. None of these laws will prevent the bad guys from obtaining the weapons they want to carry out the crime they intend. Our government cannot legislate away evil, crazy, sociopaths, psychopaths or criminal minds. Wish they could. Protecting oneself and one's family is a Constitutional right and should be exercised by anyone that wants to and can pass the background check.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MacKenzie

Jan-16-13 10:49 PM

Overdrive, the truth is any weapon used to kill or injure someone IS an assault weapon.

What no one is talking about is illegal drug use/sales and the increase of violent crime. Or, that penalties for violent crimes are too lenient. Or, that New York state doesn't have the death penalty anymore. Or, that the prosecution of violent crimes in this state is weak. Where is the legislation going after the criminals, who could never pass a background check?

Know what the progessives will say? We have to protect these poor criminals' rights. But, God forbid, the rights of law-abiding citizens be protected.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Overdrive

Jan-16-13 8:29 PM

Okay, why would anyone want an assault weapon? That is, what is a legitimate reason? I understand why some people would want hunting rifles and handguns, but I really don't see why people are clamoring to have assault weapons. All I can think of is crazy people, white supremacists, and those with hopes to overthrow the government. Who am I missing?

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FedUpL8ly

Jan-16-13 5:39 PM

Every time Obama wants to talk about guns on the street, he should be asked to explain "Fast and Furious". Holder and Obama are responsible for thousands of assault weapons being put into the hands of drug cartel members INTENTIONALLY!

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

khulumzurug

Jan-16-13 3:56 PM

In an interview with Florida’s “The Shark Tank,” Florida Republican Trey Radel addressed Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman’s statement that he might seek impeachment if Obama goes forward with executive action to bring about gun control measures.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

duckster

Jan-16-13 1:21 PM

final note: as a vet who has been shot and yes, has had to kill people...take a walk around the block and really think about if you want an ar15 at home...wtf

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Jan-16-13 1:19 PM

to the best of my recollection bob i've never read anybody posting about how you were "right on."

again, on a serious note, i've yet to discover what the recert process will entail. it appears to be a revenue scheme. evidence to the contrary would be appreciated.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

duckster

Jan-16-13 1:18 PM

The winner (and still president) is: Barack Obama... deal with it lone rider.

5 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

duckster

Jan-16-13 1:16 PM

note to the tards out there: stop this insanity

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-16-13 1:06 PM

is all about the religous fringe right gun owning paranoid conspiracy theory economic terrorists phil. In afghanistan they call them the Taliban

4 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-16-13 1:05 PM

by the way Phil, when lone says you are "right on" its not necessarily a good thing.

2 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bobbybill

Jan-16-13 1:02 PM

Mandatory background checks for all gun buyers. A ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips. More money for mental health. Stronger enforcement of the laws currently on the books.

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 44 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web