BlueWaveNJ Holding Montclair Forum on Gun Issues Tomorrow

Blue Wave NJ Forum March 2013 - sizedTomorrow evening, BlueWaveNJ, in an effort to spur additional advocacy for stricter gun laws in New Jersey, is hosting “The State of Gun Safety & Violence Prevention in 2013: An Education Forum & Advocacy Training Program” at the United Way, beginning at 6:30 p.m. Topics will include an update on current legislation under consideration at the federal and state level; what constructive actions citizens can take to move the debate forward; and how to get citizen-driven momentum started in your community.

Locally, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America (formerly known as One Million Moms for Gun Control) has also been active, encouraging citizen advocacy and supporting local, state, and national initiatives. Several area families and elected officials have also been vocal in their support of stronger gun policies at events organized or supported by BlueWaveNJ.

BlueWaveNJ’s goal is to help residents understand “the issues surrounding the epidemic of gun violence in America. Speakers will address how we got here, what we can do now to shape and pass legislation, and how we can each become more effective advocates in the fight to eliminate the incidences of tragic and unnecessary violence in our communities and nation.”

The panelists for the event include Flemington residents Michael and Teresa Pohle, who lost their son Michael Jr. during the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, and have since become vocal advocates for efforts to reduce gun violence. They’ll address implementing stronger gun laws and limiting access to dangerous weapons, and partnering with the Mayors Against Illegal Guns (M.A.I.G) and the New Jersey Coalition to Reduce Gun Violence.

Also on hand will be Jim Johnson, who served in the Treasury Department with the Clinton Administration, was formerly an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and Treasury Under Secretary for Enforcement; a position in which he oversaw the operations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF), Secret Service, the US Customs Service, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. In that role, he was on the ground in Columbine in 1999 and will discuss lessons learned from his experience fighting for new gun safety legislation in the 1990s.

The third panelist, Robert V. Tessaro, is the President of Safe School Technologies, and a recognized expert on youth violence prevention. He recently participated in a private meeting with Pres. Obama to discuss gun violence among our nation’s youth, and has served as the National Law Enforcement Director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, working with leaders in law enforcement and Congress to fight for common-sense legislation to reduce gun violence. Tessaro was also National Membership Director of Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, and Executive Director of the New Jersey Association of School Resource Officers, where he helped to train all school based police officers in NJ.

The Forum is free & open to the public, though advance reservations are requested via the event’s web page or by contacting BlueWaveNJ at 201-306-4016 or emailing bluewavenj2012@gmail.com.

The United Way is located at at 60 S. Fullerton St, Montclair (next to the Montclair Public Library). Use side entrance to first floor auditorium; parking available in rear.

BWNJ is a grassroots organization working to protect and improve the rights, opportunities, and quality of life of all people through direct advocacy, public education on critical issues, and community mobilization.

Click here to sign up for Baristanet's free daily emails and news alerts.

41 COMMENTS

  1. Criminals use guns for evil, so let’s target the law-abiding gun owners. THAT, my friends, is the Leftist model of governance. And while you are getting yourselves all worked up in a hoplophobic lather, remember, “Its for the children”.

  2. Sure, snarkdogmillionaire, but your attitude ( ” hoplophobic lather”? – good one) is exactly the reason the GOP is in big trouble now. Snark works well on Baristanet, not so much in general elections. Your candidate might get what’s left of the Palin and Santorum voters, and maybe a few Rand Paul fans. Best of luck in 2014, and beyond. You’ll need it.

  3. The Republicans of 2013 are as useless and dimwitted as the Democrats of any era. I do not speak for the Republicans or as a Republican. Neither party cares about the Constitution or the Children. The political landscape of today is absurd as are almost all of the actors. Considering the straits we are in as a nation, I’d say that we will all need the best of luck in 2014 and beyond, not just us Bitter Clingers.

  4. yes snarky, it is for the children….But unfortunately too late for the 26 innocent souls lost in Ct.

    Assault weapons : Manhood substitutes for today’s america ( with a small “a”)

  5. What if a there is a full moon and your law-abiding gun owner turns into a criminal?

    Wasn’t James Holmes a law-abiding gun owner until, well, until he wasn’t?

  6. Zephyr, by that purposefully twisted logic your First Amendment rights must be curtailed as well and immediately without resort to reason. Afterall, at some point you might turn into a lunatic and convince someone else to do something criminal with your forked tongue, at some point in the near or distant future.

    I can see the weepy Baristaville sloganeering now . . . “If only we had stopped that Zephyr BEFORE he misused his right to free speech, we might have saved just one life, possibly!!”

  7. Mrs Martta — what I would like to see is a forum on what is driving people to commit more murders with their hands and feet than with those evil “assault rifles”, which apparently are killing people by the bushel left and right, night and day.

    All snarkiness aside, it is nice to see at least one post not reflexively reaching for the tissue box. I am sure any kind of reflection will be drowned out on these boards.

  8. Hi Snark: Pleased to meet your acquaintance. Supporter of 2nd amendment here, and no, I am not a “rabid gun nut,” nor a person who is ruled by emotion when it comes such important discussions. And I will let you in on a little secret: I don’t even own a gun. But it’s nice to know that if I needed one, I could get one.

  9. Criminals use guns for evil, so let’s target the law-abiding gun owners.

    As shown in a recent Baristanet post, states that have tougher gun laws have less gun violence:

    https://www.baristanetnew.wpengine.com/2013/03/states-with-more-gun-laws-have-fewer-deaths-study-says/

    THAT, my friends, is the Leftist model of governance.

    And I suppose the rightist model of governance is support for things with no basis in fact. Witness the “tax cuts increase revenue,” intelligent design, and your arguments right here.

    As for this BlueWave event, I’m not sure why they bother. Preaching to the choir in NJ (snarkywhatever’s notwithstanding).

  10. mike 91 — “statistics” are useless in these arguments. I could easily cite studies from the University of Chicago, which you would then impugn as biased based on your own bias. This never ends.

    But if you must use stats, can we ask for some honesty? Like not equating suicide and homicide? Are we shocked that JAMA is anti-gun? And as long as we are on the subject of honesty, I will stipulate to the obvious fact that guns are, indeed, extremely dangerous tools . . . if you would agree that these studies have no basis in reality. If they are, then why are places like Chicago and Camden and Newark, laboring under the harshest gun laws in the country, so crime-ridden?

    This is a near impossible circle to square. You cannot have half-measures here, and violence will never be a problem that can be “cured”. Those are FACTS that I have built into my argument.

    So, all of you anti-2nd Amendment people should be honest with yourselves and the rest of us. WHAT IS YOU END GOAL? Anything short of repeat of the 2A will be fruitless. To suggest that banning some guns and leaving others is just plain stupid.

  11. Bluewaves bleeding heart might be in the right place but NJ has some of the toughest gun controls laws in the nation. We don’t need to add more layers to that, we need to stop the illegal guns that come in from other states and get in the hands of people without permits.

  12. mike 91 — “statistics” are useless in these arguments. I could easily cite studies from the University of Chicago, which you would then impugn as biased based on your own bias. This never ends.

    If you’re talking about Lott’s study, instead of bias, I’d point out that a study from Rutgers found his methods indefensible, including that fact that he “”compar[ed] trends in Idaho and West Virginia and Mississippi with trends in Washington, D.C. and New York City” without proper statistical controls” Find similar issues with this study and we can talk. And as a health issue (which JAMA is concerned about), suicide should be taken into account. But it doesn’t change the fact that homicide rates were down as well.

    Are we shocked that JAMA is anti-gun?

    The question to ask is, why would a medical organization be anti-gun? If guns are harmful to society from a health perspective, then what is the argument for them? In other words, if they are a crime deterrent, then why are they a health issue?

    If they are, then why are places like Chicago and Camden and Newark, laboring under the harshest gun laws in the country, so crime-ridden?

    The study submits that on a per capita basis, states with strict gun laws are safer. Newark, Camden, and Chicago are all large cities. On a per capita basis however, Missouri has more gun related deaths than Illinois.

    And like most gun advocates, you fail to mention New York City. Why would that be? Could it be that our largest city is the exception that makes the “more gun laws, more crime” rule sound idiotic?

    This is a near impossible circle to square. You cannot have half-measures here, and violence will never be a problem that can be “cured”.

    So why do we have any laws at all? Can gun violence be reduced? Did the article I posted suggest any ways to do that?

    To suggest that banning some guns and leaving others is just plain stupid.

    No, that statement is stupid. Why can’t I have a full auto machine gun? Or do you think I should be allowed to?

    And go look up the Australian assault weapons ban for a successful case study.

  13. That NJ has some strong gun laws is helpful, and it definitely impacts our safety positively a la the stats that Mike91 cites above. However, considering that the majority of guns recovered in NJ come from out of state (Thanks Mississippi!), it’s clearly a Federal issue in the long-run.

    Also, it should be noted that NJ has a terrible record regarding submitting of mental health records to the background check system. See this graphic from MAIG: https://www.demandaction.org/fatalgaps

    The Gun Lobby (funded by gun manufacturers and using the NRA as a mouthpiece) is very well organized and wealthy. Forums like this give regular people the confidence to become active and vocal about issues important to their health and safety.

  14. mike 91 . . . and again, we can go around and around. You cite JAMA. I cite Lott. You cite Rutgers. I cite the Constitution. You cite some commie left wingnut. I cite Antonin Scalia. Like I said, it never ends. After all is said and done, after all of the “experts” and studies have been referenced and refuted all we are left with is our own opinions from our relative starting points.

    –“So why do we have any laws at all? Can gun violence be reduced? Protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens and the ability of those citizens to defend themselves as they see fit overrides any PURELY HYPOTHETICAL gains in safety, especially when we’ve already tried these ridiculous partial AWBs, riven with grandfather clauses and exemptions. Massacres still happened, a lot.

    The only way to effectively reduce gun violence is to do away with guns – period. To persist in the fantasy that restricting access to one or two types of guns to a very select caste is at best naive. It is also arrogant.

    Machine guns, you people never stop. You CAN have a full auto, if you can buy the federal stamp. I don’t hear of many massacres these days with machine guns/fully automatic rifles.

    New York City . . . you’re using that as you example of a Gun Free Utopia? If you like living in a police state, then I suggest that your misplaced analogy is appropriate. If, however, you’d like more of a balance between liberty and security than you could not be farther afield. NYC, the home of Stop and Frisk??? Of course, the safest place to live is under autocratic rule. All you have to be afraid of is the autocrats. (Psst . . crime still happens here . . . a lot . . . your per-capita stats notwithstanding . . .)

    And Australia?? Really?? Are we ignoring the concomitant increases in assault/robbery/rape in the years after the ban? But that doesn’t matter. Even if it was all Unicorns and Rainbows down under, you people have to realize that the UK and AUS are NOT THE US. What works there will not work here. People outside of Essex/Hudson/Bergen/Union don’t feel the same way about guns and the Bill of Rights.

    So we’re back to my main point. Come out of the closet and state your real goal — full 2A repeal. Anything less is just political maneuvering and will solve nothing.

  15. Kristin (and all other anti-gunners) — I think the best thing that could happen to this country is to submit to a full 2A repeal, just for sh*ts and giggles. Experience is the best instructor in Life.

    If a gun is being sold cross-border, or being illegally transported across a state border, that is ALREADY a federal issue. If they are not doing enough or anything to combat it . . . that is THEIR problem, not mine. My rights should not be curtailed because of THEIR incompetence.

    “The Gun Lobby (manufacturers)” . . . you mean companies making a legal product bought by police, military and law-abiding civilians? Evil.

    “Mouthpiece NRA” . . . set up to fight the KKK in the Post-Civil War South and provide training to freed blacks, disallowed from owning guns via restrictive permitting laws. Evil.

    Now all the NRA and gun makers want to do is kill babies, unlike a small sliver of the American medical community which has killed 40-50 million babies since 1973. (But we won’t bring up THAT 800 lb gorilla)

    Regarding mental health checks, every FPID applicant in NJ must submit to a mental health records check. If the NJSP are not using the form, that is THEIR problem, not the applicant’s. Common sense says that you do not restrict gun ownership because the system the politicians have set up is not being run correctly by their enforcers.

    Again, we’re in bizarro world here.

  16. mike 91 . . . and again, we can go around and around. You cite JAMA. I cite Lott. You cite Rutgers. I cite the Constitution.

    And I’ve told you why I disagree with the Lott study, you’ve yet to point out factual problems with the study I posted. Which means that one thing does not equal another.

    And I find it hilarious that your proposed “citing” the Constitution is supposed to end all argument. For one thing, gun nuts tend not to mention the “well regulated militia” part, nor do they seem to realize that the Constitution is not the word of God and can be revised. The constitution used to contain the three-fifth’s compromise, too.

    Protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens and the ability of those citizens to defend themselves as they see fit overrides any PURELY HYPOTHETICAL gains in safety

    Sorry, not hypothetical at all, especially when it should be blatantly obvious to any thinking person that reducing the availability of guns reduces gun violence.

    And remember what we are discussing here, which is the assault weapons ban. No one is talking about guns generally seen as proper for self defense, although perhaps we should be. You’ll still be able to play Wyatt Earp, although again, statistics prove that a gun in the home is several times more likely to be used against you, or by you to kill yourself.

    And Australia?? Really?? Are we ignoring the concomitant increases in assault/robbery/rape in the years after the ban?

    And that was definately caused by fewer guns, right? All else was equal? I’m sure you have a cite for that.

    Machine guns, you people never stop. You CAN have a full auto, if you can buy the federal stamp. I don’t hear of many massacres these days with machine guns/fully automatic rifles.

    That’s not the point. The point is that we already regulate weapons. We seem to prohibit all weapons used by armed forces except one kind. Why is that?

    So we’re back to my main point. Come out of the closet and state your real goal — full 2A repeal. Anything less is just political maneuvering and will solve nothing.

    And again, no one is talking about that. Your continued contention that gun regulation is either all or none is contrary to both common sense and the current reality.

  17. “…they shall beat their swords into plowshares , and their spears into pruning hooks”
    ….Isaiah
    “Ah luv mah gun”
    ….2nd Amendment fan.
    “Again, we’re in bizarro world here”
    ….snarkdogmillionaire

  18. Thank you mike 91.

    — “well regulated militia” — typical of Leftists, you accentuate the prefatory clause over the operative clause — “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The SCOTUS has clarified in two recent cases that the 2A is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT, not limited to service in a gov’t sponsored “militia”. Point being, the 2A applies to individuals as well as states/municipalities. Sorry.

    — “nor do they seem to realize that the Constitution is not the word of God and can be revised.” PRECISELY!!! Which is the point of my entire argument. Come out of the closet and support the only true measure that will Save the Children — full repeal of the 2A. But you and your kind will never reveal your true desire because you are cognizant enough to know that the American People are not yet THAT brain dead. There is still the seed of distrust of gov’t in this country. It is part of our DNA.

    — “The constitution used to contain the three-fifth’s compromise” I love this one from you folks. You grasp on to any weak reed thinking it a cudgel with which you can bash America on its head. The 3/5 COMPROMISE was an anti-slavery measure, not a statement of racial superiority, hackneyed 1960s groupthink notwithstanding. Anti-slavery delegates were gifted with some traits we do not possess today – foresight and wisdom. They knew that a population-driven representative scheme would be swamped by a slave-swelled South. Limiting the census to only count 3 out of every 5 slaves reduced the legislative power of the Slave states. I am surprised, but yet also not surprised that this is not obvious. Considering the near unending string of pro-slavery/unconcerned Presidents up until 1860, it is a lucky thin the House was so comprised. Evil racists.

    — “That’s not the point. The point is that we already regulate weapons. We seem to prohibit all weapons used by armed forces except one kind. Why is that?” The military also uses the same kind of shotguns and handguns used by civilians. Should those be banned? (crickets) The courts have ruled that certain weapon classes can be prohibited if not part of common usage. ie Sawed-off shotguns. There is literally no common purpose for that kind of modification, and it preferred by criminals because the homemade modification is designed to increase concealability, not performance.

    More importantly, Semi-automatic rifles are not generally used in the military. They use selective fire rifles. So, the civilian model AR-15 is NOT a military weapon, it just looks like one, while being functionally little different than many hunting rifles and shotguns.

    –“And remember what we are discussing here, which is the assault weapons ban.” Rifles of all types killed 300+ people in the last full year of stats by the FBI. The scary-looking and misnamed “Assault Weapon” accounted for some percentage of that, so less than 300ish. That is what you and your ilk are basing your hysteria on? The exact body count is not even known, but you are ready to storm the halls of congress and DEMAND ACTION!!! Meanwhile 12000+ are gunned down with handguns. Yet no one says a peep. THAT is hypocritical. It points to ulterior motives, which undercuts the entire Anti-gun argument. If you want something, go for it and state it clearly. Otherwise, don’t play the game. Have the guts to fight for your convictions.

    You can cite studies and easily manipulated statistics upon which many anti-gun myths have been founded, all day long. It has no bearing on my right, as a law-abiding individual, to own guns, as many as I want, of any type currently available on the legal market. And every legal measure you produce will only serve to deprive people like me of access to my rights, not the criminals you are supposedly targeting.

  19. I don’t know what’s funnier — snark’s hilarious belief that his arms stash is going to protect him from SEAL Team 6 when they crash through the door, or his stunning assertion that the three-fifths compromise was an anti-slavery measure.

    Of course, had slaves been counted as whole persons, slave holding states would have had far greater representation that “free” states. That’s what they wanted. Delegates from the “free” states wanted no slaves counted at all, thereby giving them the advantage. The compromise settled things for awhile (70 years or so, what foresight! Talk about “kicking the can down the road’), but it still gave slave states more representatives relative to voters than they were entitled to. Some “anti-slavery” measure.

    But good for you, snarky. You go right ahead and amass your arsenal against that day when the evil leftists set up the concentration camps and handing out the red scarves.

  20. I would like to see a panel discussion that examines the reason why more and more people feel they have to resort to gun violence.

    Perhaps because more and more people have easy access to guns?

  21. Cro – excellent reasoning!!!!! Why didn’t those chaps in 1787 break completely out of their historical period and just DEMAND the South giveup all of their positions???? #CroFail

    The plain truth is that 3/5 was the best that could be gotten and did limit te slave power, in combination with the 1808 ban on slave importation. They were thinking generationally, not emotionally. Yeah, anti-slavery measure. As for your “representatives-to-voters” meanderings … That has no place in a time period where the entire voting base, across sections, bore little association with actual populations. To say one was more dense tha te other is meaningless. The Congressional balance was maintained and the Government that would eventually abolish and then outlaw slavery was established. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.

    I don’t get te whole SEAL Team 6 comment. Non-sequitir.

  22. Dear SDM, The NRA was not founded to combat the KKK. It was founded because few people were decent shots. (And most still are poor shots, hence the popularity of the AR-15 type of weapon that makes people think they are great marksmen.)

    See here: https://www.nrahq.org/history.asp

    A summary:

    AIMS OF THE ASSOCIATION

    The main aim of the Association is the encouragement of rifle practice throughout this State and the United States.

    They also desire to promote the establishment of ranges throughout the State, and the issue of ammunition, target, and other appurtenances required for their use with offering of prizes both by the State, and by individuals, to the best marksmen.

    They also seek to build up local of a similar character to their own, which while under official supervision to ensure then proper, yet will be so popular in their character as to secure success.

  23. Sniffing all of that gunpowder has addled you a bit, snarky. “Slave” states had 45% of the seats in the first House. That was due to the extra seats they got from the compromise. It did not limit the power of slave states, it increased it. Just not by as much as they wanted. Plantation owners in particular were empowered by it.

    As for “breaking out of patterns”, yeah. Why not. After all, as you reminded us, they were far more insightful than we are. Could it be, snarky, that the very existence of provisions for slavery at all made the Constitution a flawed document from the outset? That would go a long way towards explaining the 2nd amendment as well.

    The SEAL Team is apparently who you believe will be sent to get you, hence your need as articulated in your post to protect your self from the government. The ‘autocrats”. Its in your DNA!

    #snarkclueless (but cute!)

  24. How about a discussion on something actually important? What about adding real jobs to our economy? NJ is something like 4th worst in the country in unemployment.

  25. snarkdogmillionaire? What in god’s name are we supposed to make of that?

    You should have gone with snarkdoggazillionaire, snark. Millionaires are a dime a dozen these days.

  26. While what happened in CT is a tragedy, additional gun restrictions will not help. Most gun violance in the US, is Black on Black shooting with illegal guns. The problem is in the Black community or the lack of a Black community.
    Liberals can rant & rave & accuse me of being a Racist, it does not change the facts.

  27. I would like to see a panel discussion that examines the reason why more and more people feel they have to resort to gun violence.

    Perhaps because more and more people have easy access to guns?

    Not really, Pork Roll. Guns have been here since the dawning of America and criminals have always had access to them. But we never had the number of mass shootings (schools, malls, etc.) like we have had in the past 10 years. There is something else going on.

  28. typical of Leftists, you accentuate the prefatory clause over the operative clause

    Blah blah clause. The truth is, whatever the case law currently is, the second amendment was written before this country has a standing army, and the militia was supposed to assist in the defense of the country. You might acknowledge that, and also acknowledge that the Supreme Court has changed the meaning, but that leads to the slippery slope of someone coming to get your guns, or something.

    There is still the seed of distrust of gov’t in this country. It is part of our DNA.

    Ah, there we have it. Forget home defense. The true gun nut’s desire is to die in some blaze of glory fighting in some revolution against a tyrannical government. That’s why they want these assault weapons. To fuel some juvenile fantasy about armed resistance.

    You grasp on to any weak reed thinking it a cudgel with which you can bash America on its head.

    The point is, the constitution can be revised. I should have used prohibition, which would have saved you a lot of time putting together your nonsensical rant.

    The courts have ruled that certain weapon classes can be prohibited if not part of common usage.

    So we do regulate guns? Cause that was my point.

    So, the civilian model AR-15 is NOT a military weapon, it just looks like one, while being functionally little different than many hunting rifles and shotguns.

    Except for the magazine capacity, which is the main reason for the AWB.

    Meanwhile 12000+ are gunned down with handguns. Yet no one says a peep. THAT is hypocritical.

    I am pro-tougher hand gun laws, as evidenced by the report I posted. We need to stop the illegal flow of guns into states that have strict laws from those that don’t.

    You can cite studies and easily manipulated statistics upon which many anti-gun myths have been founded, all day long

    Yep, and you can deny that statistics and facts have any role in the argument, and you can look like an idiot.

    And every legal measure you produce will only serve to deprive people like me of access to my rights, not the criminals you are supposedly targeting.

    A myth. Strict gun laws bring down gun violence, because common sense says that the fewer there are of something, the fewer opportunities for them to be involved.

    Go look at the statistics in Japan, or Great Britain. Why do they have orders of magnitude fewer gun deaths?

  29. “Zephyr, by that purposefully twisted logic your First Amendment rights must be curtailed as well and immediately without resort to reason. Afterall, at some point you might turn into a lunatic and convince someone else to do something criminal with your forked tongue, at some point in the near or distant future. I can see the weepy Baristaville sloganeering now . . .If only we had stopped that Zephyr BEFORE he misused his right to free speech, we might have saved just one life, possibly!!”

    You know you’re not going to believe me but I swear that, last week in the subway, I saw a man wearing a tutu and a viking helmet made out of tinfoil perched atop a milkcrate yelling these exact same words to a crumpled McDonald’s bag.

  30. I swear, some gun lovers remind me of used vacuum bags. They make a high pitched whining sound while they suck up the rejected, dusty residue from talk radio and cable tv, and, then, if you just push on them a bit, they spew cat hair and dust balls all over the room.

  31. STQ its kind of the other way around. The anti-gun crowd is crew making all the noise over a vitrual non-issue. The pro-gun crowd is just responding to the nonsense.

  32. Massacres in movie theatres, shopping malls, religious temples, college campusses, high schools and pre K’s are a non issue ??

    Ridiculous.

  33. Agreed. I would like to see more cogent, rational arguments and less emotional ones on the topic. One of the headlines in today’s Daily News for example reads, “Congress has betrayed the dead and the living! Have they no spine, no shame?” Overkill much?

    As Snarkdogmillionaire points out, there are more deaths attributed to handguns than assault weapons. You are most apt to get people to the table to listen to your cause if that cause is presented in a more rational manner, with “cooler heads” prevailing.

  34. “Massacres in movie theatres, shopping malls, religious temples, college campusses, high schools and pre K’s are a non issue??”

    You need to lay the emotional appeal BS to rest.

    Context is key. When we only have a few hundred people running the country there are far more pressing issues that need attention than a ban on something that is the cause of so few (< 250 or annually) deaths and effects so very very few people. Again set your emotions aside.

    There are much more significant problems in this country that effect far more people. The efforts of our leaders should be directed here instead.

    All of that said why not start with handguns which are the cause 90% plus of gun deaths?

    Non-issue, get over it.

  35. “I swear, some gun lovers remind me of used vacuum bags…”

    — Spiro T. Quayle will be appearing at the Concord Resort Hotel in the Catskills this weekend.

  36. Non issue, eh ?

    Why, I’d bet you’d have no problem at all saying that directly to the Ct. parents and any other family victims of mass shootings with military type weapons, Right ?

    You need to lay your own BS to rest.

Comments are closed.