Domestic terrorism

A lot of the people who are into guns usually come from families with a gun culture. It is ingrained into them early and they don't see anything wrong with it and get very defensive about outside ideas on the subject. They deny any facts that don't fall inline with what they want to believe. It is quite like religion or a cult.

Also gun people tend to be people who can't deal with fear as well.


http://kuukunen.net/pics/facepalm/FACEPALM.JPG

I don't have a problem if the president want to expand and strengthen the background checks.

Like the president said, none of the proposals would have stop any of the mass shootings. Also like the president agreed last night, violent crime rates are at an all time low and gun ownership is at all time high. The last 30 years murder rate has dropped drastically. Minors killed by guns his dropped massively.

So I would ask, why does Chicago enjoy using guns to kill one another? Y is Chicago out of step with most of the country? Try having that discussion. Why doesn't Obama pick up the phone and talk with his close friend who runs that city? Excuses in Chicago have run out...

chicagos a whole can of worms that has a lot to do with socio-economics etc. it's something that really should be addressed, and probably needs to be looked at top down. it's not just a gun problem though.

Two refugees arrested on terror-related charges - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/us/terror-charges-refugees/index.html)

Here is an under reported story...you cant even find it on msnbc, strange how that is?

A lot of the people who are into guns usually come from families with a gun culture. It is ingrained into them early and they don't see anything wrong with it and get very defensive about outside ideas on the subject. They deny any facts that don't fall inline with what they want to believe. It is quite like religion or a cult.

Also gun people tend to be people who can't deal with fear as well.

http://kuukunen.net/pics/facepalm/FACEPALM.JPG

I just love when people speak with a certainty about another person's subjective intent and personality traits and particularly when they transfer this certainty to the intent of a large group of individuals.

The whole topic of gun control creates so many idiotic statements that I despair as to any real dialogue. Each side just points at the other and says "I don't understand why you disagree with me so you must be stupid."

I'll never understand the fascination with guns.

Totally agree.

We went to Cabals in DE last week with our neighbors. We were walking around the gun part just laughing our asses off at what a waste of money it was. We really lost our shit when we came to the "champagne room" where they kept the even fancier more stupid expensive guns.

Sorry if I offended anyone but it just seems like a total waste to me. Go buy a PS4 and and COD and just have at it.

As for the Bundy's "protest," they have seized federal property under force of arms and have indicated that they will use force against any federal, state or local lawfully authorized enforcement officers. If I were President, I would notify them that they have 48 hours to lay down their arms and surrender. If they fail to do so, the full force and power of the United States will be brought to bear against them.

I would inform them that I consider them to be bearing arms in revolt against the lawfully and duly elected government of the US, Oregon and County and, as such, they will be treated as traitors leading an armed insurrection. If they surrender peacefully, they will be treated with leniency but they will still be prosecuted in federal and state courts for their illegal actions. If they failed to surrender, the full force of the US Army will be brought to bear.

I would then move a regiment of infantry to surround the area at a safe distance to prevent any one from joining them and park some nice big ass mobile artillery to target the building. They would receive an hourly countdown with notice that the artillery will open fire on any traitors remaining on federal property when time expires. At the 48 hour mark, I would give the order to open fire and not think twice.

Their actions are unlawful and constitute an armed rebellion. They are rebels and traitors and should be treated as such.

... and don't give me the "Our founding fathers were considered rebels and traitors." The founders were ruled by a government where they had no lawful means of representation. They had no one to represent them in Parliament and no inherent right to peacefully assemble to voice their discontent. These dickheads have all that. No, the real analogy here is the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791.

The Whiskey Rebellion, also known as the Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. ... The [tax] was a part of U.S. treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton's program to fund war debt incurred during the American Revolutionary War.

The tax was resisted by farmers in the western frontier regions who were long accustomed to distilling their surplus grain and corn into whiskey. ... Many of the resisters were war veterans who believed that they were fighting for the principles of the American Revolution, in particular against taxation without local representation, while the U.S. federal government maintained the taxes were the legal expression of the taxation powers of Congress.

Throughout counties in Western Pennsylvania, protesters used violence and intimidation to prevent federal officials from collecting the tax. Resistance came to a climax in July 1794, when a U.S. marshal arrived in western Pennsylvania to serve writs to distillers who had not paid the excise. The alarm was raised, and more than 500 armed men attacked the fortified home of tax inspector General John Neville. Washington responded by sending peace commissioners to western Pennsylvania to negotiate with the rebels, while at the same time calling on governors to send a militia force to enforce the tax. With 13,000 militiamen provided by the governors of Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, Washington rode at the head of an army to suppress the insurgency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

Seems be pretty much spot on to me .

I'll never understand the fascination with guns.
I think that is probably the most factual statement I have read in this thread.......
And Joe....whatever it is you don't agree with....You're stupid..lol

As for the Bundy's "protest," they have seized federal property under force of arms and have indicated that they will use force against any federal, state or local lawfully authorized enforcement officers. If I were President, I would notify them that they have 48 hours to lay down their arms and surrender. If they fail to do so, the full force and power of the United States will be brought to bear against them.

I would inform them that I consider them to be bearing arms in revolt against the lawfully and duly elected government of the US, Oregon and County and, as such, they will be treated as traitors leading an armed insurrection. If they surrender peacefully, they will be treated with leniency but they will still be prosecuted in federal and state courts for their illegal actions. If they failed to surrender, the full force of the US Army will be brought to bear.

I would then move a regiment of infantry to surround the area at a safe distance to prevent any one from joining them and park some nice big ass mobile artillery to target the building. They would receive an hourly countdown with notice that the artillery will open fire on any traitors remaining on federal property when time expires. At the 48 hour mark, I would give the order to open fire and not think twice.

Their actions are unlawful and constitute an armed rebellion. They are rebels and traitors and should be treated as such.

... and don't give me the "Our founding fathers were considered rebels and traitors." The founders were ruled by a government where they had no lawful means of representation. They had no one to represent them in Parliament and no inherent right to peacefully assemble to voice their discontent. These dickheads have all that. No, the real analogy here is the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

Seems be pretty much spot on to me .

An armed confrontation is just want these folks want, much like ISIS. I legitimizes this faux sense of cause.

Totally agree.

We went to Cabals in DE last week with our neighbors. We were walking around the gun part just laughing our asses off at what a waste of money it was. We really lost our shit when we came to the "champagne room" where they kept the even fancier more stupid expensive guns.

Sorry if I offended anyone but it just seems like a total waste to me. Go buy a PS4 and and COD and just have at it.

Oh yea, thats a fair comparison.
Just download a flight sim.
Same thing as flying an F-15 or a 747.
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes008.gif

An armed confrontation is just want these folks want, much like ISIS. I legitimizes this faux sense of cause.

I get that. Forming a perimeter and starving them out is another response. However, that just creates a siege which, in turn, presents a whole separate set of problems, costs, and risks. The more attention the traitors actions garner; the more tension they creates throughout the country. Right now, they are a festering open wound and strong, lawful, and definitive action is needed. Save the hugs for later. This is one of those situations that, no matte what is done, each side will spin for their own benefit.

In the Whiskey Rebellion, by the time the US Army showed up, the rebels decided "hmm, looks like they gonna kick our ass" and peacefully dispersed without a shot fired. To paraphrase Mike Tyson "Everyone has a plan until they have M109A6 Paladin aimed at their face."

Just as in that case, strong, decisive leadership that takes firm, fair, and lawful action is needed. G. Washington, the supreme diplomat general, exhibited just those traits when confronted with this type of insurrection.

Unfortunately, we have Obama.