The Virginia General Assembly convenes today. This year is a short session so the lawmakers will meet for 46 days. That seems like enough time for them to get us in to trouble.
I am holding my breath to see what they have in store for us this year.
I wish they would address texting while driving. That looks like a good place to start. What do you all thinK should be addressed this year in the General Assembly. Maybe they should listen to OUR ideas.
I might get rid of the Dillon Rule. Pros? Cons?
As little as I trust the Imperial Clown Show in Richmond, I trust our local BOCS Clown Show even less so I’ll keep the Dillon Rule and the restriction on stupidity it places on the BOCS.
Thinking back, you might be on to something.@MoM (out of the naughty chair today)
BTW, I quite enjoy the “naughty chair” I just wish yours was as comfortable as Corey’s naughty chair which I occupy even more frequently, but then again, his was paid for with taxpayer dollars.
It was just a brief stint. I just didn’t want the others sneaking you treats and buying you drinks.
I’m not sure where, but I heard that there were only 2 states still on the Dillon rule. 48 other States thought it was a bad idea.
Actually more than thirty states still operate under the Dillon Rule or some bastardized amalgamation of Home Rule and the Dillon Rule, it varies rather widely.
It does vary widely and the results are pretty inconclusive as to whether or not it produces better results.
http://www.richmondsunlight.com/about/side/
A good site to help follow the General Assembly.
It is up in our tabs…far right re richmond sunlight.
Meet the Sandy Hook truthers
Theorists think they’ve found “absolute proof” that Newtown was a hoax. Have they no shame?
BY ALEX SEITZ-WALD
Yes, there really are Newtown truthers.
But in the crazy world of Sandy Hook conspiracy theories, this one may be the worst yet. (Maybe you’ve already heard some of the others, like the one about fantasy ties between the gunman’s family and the LIBOR banking scandal and a related theory about the Aurora shooting and the “Dark Knight Rises.”) Most of the theories are really pieces of a larger meta-theory: that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax, perhaps by the Obama administration, designed to stir demand for gun control.
In the latest angle, theorists think they have found “absolute proof” of a conspiracy to defraud the American people. “You reported in December that this little girl had been killed,” a reader emailed Salon in response to a story. “She has been found, and photographed with President Obama.”
The girl in question is Emilie Parker, a 6-year-old who was shot multiple times and killed at Sandy Hook. But for conspiracy theorists, the tears her family shed at her funeral, the moving eulogy from Utah’s governor, and the entire shooting spree are fake. Welcome to the world where Sandy Hook didn’t really happen.
There are dozens of websites, blog posts and YouTube videos extolling the Emilie Parker hoax theory. If you Google her name, the very first result is a post mocking her father for crying at a press conference after the shooting. One popular video, which already has 134,000 views, was made by the producers of a popular 9/11 Truther film. “Just as the movie ‘Operation Terror’ shows the 9/11 attacks were a made-for-TV event, so too were the mass shootings … There can be no doubt that Sandy Hook was a staged event,” the narrator intones. He goes on to say that the adults who participated in the media coverage of the shootings “should be prosecuted as accessories after the fact in a mass murder” — i.e., the parents whose children were murdered in the massacre should be thrown in prison.
The crux of the theory is a photograph of Parker’s sister sitting on President Obama’s lap when he visited with the victims’ families. The girl is wearing the same dress Emilie wore in a pre-shooting photograph of the family shared with media, so she must be Emilie, alive and well. “BAM! I cannot believe how idiot these people are [sic]… That’s her,” one YouTuber exclaims as he watches the two images superimposed on each other. (Apparently missed by these crack investigators is the possibility that the sister wore Emilie’s dress and that they look alike because they are sisters, after all.)
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/the_worst_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory_yet/
This is the most disgusting thing I have ever herd in my life
Meet the Sandy Hook truthers
Theorists think they’ve found “absolute proof” that Newtown was a hoax. Have they no shame?
BY ALEX SEITZ-WALD
Yes, there really are Newtown truthers.
But in the crazy world of Sandy Hook conspiracy theories, this one may be the worst yet. (Maybe you’ve already heard some of the others, like the one about fantasy ties between the gunman’s family and the LIBOR banking scandal and a related theory about the Aurora shooting and the “Dark Knight Rises.”) Most of the theories are really pieces of a larger meta-theory: that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax, perhaps by the Obama administration, designed to stir demand for gun control.
In the latest angle, theorists think they have found “absolute proof” of a conspiracy to defraud the American people. “You reported in December that this little girl had been killed,” a reader emailed Salon in response to a story. “She has been found, and photographed with President Obama.”
The girl in question is Emilie Parker, a 6-year-old who was shot multiple times and killed at Sandy Hook. But for conspiracy theorists, the tears her family shed at her funeral, the moving eulogy from Utah’s governor, and the entire shooting spree are fake. Welcome to the world where Sandy Hook didn’t really happen.
There are dozens of websites, blog posts and YouTube videos extolling the Emilie Parker hoax theory. If you Google her name, the very first result is a post mocking her father for crying at a press conference after the shooting. One popular video, which already has 134,000 views, was made by the producers of a popular 9/11 Truther film. “Just as the movie ‘Operation Terror’ shows the 9/11 attacks were a made-for-TV event, so too were the mass shootings … There can be no doubt that Sandy Hook was a staged event,” the narrator intones. He goes on to say that the adults who participated in the media coverage of the shootings “should be prosecuted as accessories after the fact in a mass murder” — i.e., the parents whose children were murdered in the massacre should be thrown in prison.
The crux of the theory is a photograph of Parker’s sister sitting on President Obama’s lap when he visited with the victims’ families. The girl is wearing the same dress Emilie wore in a pre-shooting photograph of the family shared with media, so she must be Emilie, alive and well. “BAM! I cannot believe how idiot these people are [sic]… That’s her,” one YouTuber exclaims as he watches the two images superimposed on each other. (Apparently missed by these crack investigators is the possibility that the sister wore Emilie’s dress and that they look alike because they are sisters, after all.)
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/the_worst_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory_yet/
This is the most disgusting thing I have ever heard in my life. Gun worshippers claiming that grieving parents are actors is utterly heinous and despicable.
Is this gun whorship or mental illness?
Totally disgusting.
http://www.demandaplan.org/
“Man up”, everyone.
The ratio of criminals in Mayors against illegal guns is greater than that of criminals in concealed carry, including gun charges.
The Mayors also use deception, listing mayors that have had to go public stating that they never joined and did not support the group.
1) Require a criminal background check for every gun sold in America
2) Ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines
3) Make gun trafficking a federal crime, with real penalties for “straw purchasers”
1) requires registration of all firearms, which does nothing to fight crime. Also – Not happening. Background checks have not prevented any of the high profile cases. Nobody ever stopped by a background check for illegally attempting to buy a firearm has been arrested.
2) No such thing as an “assault weapon.” Previous “ban” defined only cosmetic terms. The rifle used in CT was not defined as an “assault weapon” by CT.
3) gun trafficking is a federal crime.
Chicago is the epitome of their utopia. See their crime rate.
Gun control is what you do instead of something.
One sure sign of their deception is the continued use of the deceptive buzzword “common sense,” hoping to bring in uninformed people to their agenda.
Their idea of “common sense” is a ban.
Cargo, you would try to blow holes in whatever language is used. I resent that. i will continue to say assault weapons. The fact that I don’t know some esoteric word used to describe a certain type of weapon should not be used to silence me. I am not interested in guns that have high capacity magazines and fire repeatedly, therefore I don’t know the gun hobbyist word of choice. I will stick to mine. Assault weapon works. This is another example of an attempt to bully…well there is no such thing so it discredits what I am saying. Well, no it doesn’t.
Tell you what….that is how I feel about the use of the word ‘partial birth abortion.’ There is no such thing. However, it is a phrase that people who oppose abortion latched on to and managed to enact lots of legislation using the word. What they really mean is D & X procedure. The term ‘partial birth’ was developed to creawte a very negative imagine in people’s minds without actually describing what goes on. That incorrect term worked. Think about it.
How do you prevent a high profile case? If it is prevented then nothing happens and can’t be a high profile case. Talk about double speak. You really are becoming a snake oil salesman, Cargo.
http://www.stopillegalmayors.com/
Here’s the link for the “something.” This is the problem. Not the two hundred million peaceful gun owners.
We have to develop policies and a culture to address THIS problem.
http://www.redstate.com/2013/01/09/the-real-gun-violence-problem/
Let’s talk about some points in this article. Let’s talk about rifles vs handguns. Aren’t these terms a little vague? Can handguns be used in this present dicussion? Absolutely. Multiple firing, large capacity magazines? Yup. What is a handgun? Gun that fits in your hand? Trying to distinguish between handguns and rifles? I think this attempt to deflect the issue is just that…deflection.
No, the democrats didn’t avoid the discussion. Do you really think this discussion could be avoided if Newtown, Ct. had happened in October?
Think again. The fact that 20 little children were mowed down in cold blood by someone with, yes, assault weapons, is the issue. The fact that they were school children, in their classrooms where there parents had sent them, is the focus and what brings this problem all back home and to the forefront. Americans simply aren’t going to accept non-change. That’s the reality.
Yes, handguns, whatever that means are a problem–a huge problem, especially those not bought legally. Virginia’s solution to such a problem was to drop the limit on being able to buy more than 13 handguns a year per person. It is particularly interesting because Virginia was known as a gun running state where criminals could buy up guns and take them to states with stricter gun laws, such as NY. How many people can a handgun kill? How big is the magazine? Those are the questions we need to ask, not try to divert the thinking over to protecting minorities.
@Moon-howler
The fact that I don’t know some esoteric word used to describe a certain type of weapon should not be used to silence me. I am not interested in guns that have high capacity magazines and fire repeatedly, therefore I don’t know the gun hobbyist word of choice.
That’s just IT. It ISN’T a “gun hobbyist” word of choice. Its the LEGAL definition of a weapon, with differing definitions, based upon cosmetic changes of a semi-auto rifle, developed by the GUN CONTROL crowd.
Disagreement and an attempt at accuracy is not bullying. Stop playing the victim. No one is bullying you.
“How do you prevent a high profile case?”
I don’t see my use of such a term. Am I missing something?
Aren’t these terms a little vague?
Um…no? Because a rifle is a description of a certain type of weapon and a handgun is a specific term for a pistol.
The limit was dropped because it was proven that the “gun running” was a myth promulgated by Bloomberg. “Time to crime” of “traced guns” averaged in the years. The problem is that ANY gun owned without the express permission of the powers that be in NYC is an “illegal gun” and that is what Bloomberg is whining about. Perhaps NY should join the free world.
I understand that you are locked onto the idea that there is some magic number of bullets that a gun should hold that would be ok. From your statements, that number is effectively…ONE. Perhaps zero. So, basically, a defacto ban of 99% of all modern weapons in America. The country will not be getting rid of millions of firearms, at least, not without a huge conflict in the courts and perhaps in the streets.
You ask, how many people can a handgun kill? Well, apparently a few thousand when used by criminals. How many people can use it for defense…many MORE thousand. And even though the word “need” is not found in the Bill of Rights…who “needs” more rounds? Try women in the home, defending themselves and family. The news just reported in the last few days that a woman saw someone breaking in. She took her kids and a .38 revolver into a closet and hid. The man tracked her down and opened the door. She hit him 5 times, leaving the gun empty. He drove away and crashed his car.
Now…what if there had been TWO men? And she had just emptied her gun into one of them. And if she had more ammo, time to reload is a long time. So, until she does…she was defenseless. There is no such thing as enough ammo when defending yourself and loved ones. That is a proven fact.
Yes. Kids died. And even more died over time in the “gun free” zone of Chicago. But the common elements are that the shootings take place in a “gun free zone” AND that criminals don’t care about gun bans. And so, your “common sense” idea is to restrict ammo or guns from lawful owners…..millions of people.
Next time Al Sharpton incites a riot in which people die…can we ban speech?
@Lyssa
I actually thought about this one. I agree with her. (the MoM) I just wish they would keep my name to themselves.
Does anyone know a stealth way of agreeing without risking 10 more groups wanting money from you?
“Those are the questions we need to ask, not try to divert the thinking over to protecting minorities.”
So, determining why inner cities are so violence prone and the black population has a high ratio of murder compared to whites/others, is NOT something we should do? Because its not the presence of guns…since, if it was….the crime rate would averaged out across the board where ever there are guns. Gun control was first introduced as a racist way to prevent blacks from owning weapons. Oh…look. In many cases….lawful ownership of weapons by poor blacks is STILL illegal. Funny how that works….
Its the culture not the gun. And yet, your reply is a perfect example of why that culture continues to flourish. Gun control is what you do instead of something.
@Cargo
“Background checks have not prevented any of the high profile cases.”
Would there be a high profile case if it were prevented?
NO
Actually you are doing a very good job of bullying me. You are attempting to discredit everything I have said by arguing over vocabulary. If I don’t use the vocabulary you want me to use, then I am full of crap. I get it.
I know how to play that game also. I don’t do it because really it is not effective communication and only serves to drown out the other person with volume. However, let the first reproductive rights bill come up and I will gladly strut my stuff, just for display purposes, of course.
The point is, why bother. How about you putting the word down you want ME to use to describe your guns that you think would be ok to restrict from every day purchase in Virginia, or perhaps the nation.
If you have time, perhaps put down what that gun has that puts it on the no no list.
@Cargo, as for the handgun remark I made, I obviously meant in one shooting spree. I don’t mean over the lifetime of a handgun.
Obviously.
I just don’t think you want to give up any toys.
Pardon my English, its the f-ing gun. I am so tired of hearing guns don’t kill people do. That is such bullshit. Weapons are used by people to kill.
Stop trying to drag blacks into the discussion. Again, you are trying to deflect. Here is the real issue: There are weapons out there that when they get into the wrong hands, become lethal to large groups of people. We need to get those weapons under tighter security and those people under more security.
I am not discrediting concern over handgun violence. One step at a time. Right now Americans are up in arms over mass killings.
If I were a gun hobbyist with strong political feelings, I would not want to call attention to the handgun problem. Let sleeping dogs lie.
@Cargosquid
More info needs to be added to your example of the woman defending herself and her family. The man rang the doorbell several times. She saw him leave her porch and go to his car before he returned to the door. She could have taken her children out her back door and to her neighbors. She called her husband during this episode. She could have called the police and left her house. The man had tried something similar in another neighborhood but left when someone answered the door. It’s not so clear cut and she will have to lawyer up because of the way she handled the situation. (I’m sure all the gun nuts will contribute to her defense though.)
Girls and Enlighten both premiere on HBO this Sunday night starting at 9 pm. (season 2)
If your DVR is at capacity because of Revenge and Downtown Abbey, you can always just wait until midnight and watch the HBO shows on your computer at HBOgo.com
It is a good way to handle those nights when too much is good.
If you aren’t in command of HBOgo.com, give me a holler.
@Moon-howler
“I agree with her. (the MoM)”
Of course you do, it just takes some longer to come around to my way of thinking. It truly is a blessing to always be right, and it saves time.
“Those people” are the cause of the murders. Which people? You ignore the crime culture and yet you blame their tools. You call it deflection because you don’t want to deal with the fact that the inner city drug culture is the cause of the majority of the murders. Its not deflection. Its the reality. But changing THAT would be doing something to affect the actual cause of the violence, instead of just going after lawful gun owners. Your emotions state that “its the f..king gun. But the reality is that it is not. You are wrong. Americans are up in arms over this mass killing. Yes. And yet, it is not a reason to abuse the rights of millions of gun owners.
I am not bullying you. I am being accurate. You are using language to convince people to your way of thinking. That language was invented to be “scary” and non-specific. You have advocated banning all semi-auto weapons here on Moonhowlings. I oppose your ideas and will point out where they are problematical. You are writing, using language developed by the gun control crowd. That language is used to convince people of THEIR rightness. 2nd Amendment supporters have learned that using accurate language, educating readers, and exposing their lies, works.
If you think that I’m trying to discredit you over vocabulary, then perhaps you need to change the vocabulary instead of worrying about “bullying.” You are trying to discredit the whole idea of the 2nd Amendment of being a right. You continue to state the words hobby and games when talking about fundamental rights of Americans. YOU are using weasel words like “common sense” while advocating radical programs. I refuse to accept your premise and your vocabulary. As it has been said elsewhere…words mean things.
The first rule of bullying is the person being bullied gets to decide whether they are being bullied or not, not the bully. Yes, you are being a cyber bully. That’s how it works.
Actually I haven’t suggested banning anything. Regulating, yes. banning no. I didn’t invent the word assault weapon. Probably Rambo did.
Exposing their lies? Who is lying? Kids were mowed down? Is that frightening language? If it isn’t, it should be frightening. I hope it is frightening.
Here is the rub…many people who now want some sort of regulation are gun owners. Not hobbyist necessarily but people who own a gun or two for self protection. Many of those people also feel its time to rein in some of the way we buy, sell, keep and use weapons in this country because we have some rather frightening statistics, especially compared to other western countries.
We have had many massacres in recent years. These massacres have some common denominators. Guns with huge capacity magazines, multiple firing weapons, mentally ill people or people who have temporarily gone off their rockers. Some of these people had a penchant for playing violent video games.
So, we start talking as a society about what to do about these problems. Right out of the gate the NRA person points fingers and accepts no part of ownership of the problem and suggests armed guards in every school. DOH! Slapping head. what’s wrong with this picture?
Not us buddy, not us. then him and all of you all get all crazy pissed off at the rest of us and call us all liars and start the fight over language. We are using the wrong language, we don’t know what we are talking about. blah blah blah. Piers Morgan talks about it and all of a sudden, 104k people want him deported. bullying? Pretty much so. I saw the bully on TV also. The Gun hobby people don’t want to hear anything we have to say. They don’t want to change at all. Those options are over. There will be change.
Now wait until the people who want to get rid of all guns get going.
Back to binary situations…if you aren’t a gun nut who want no restrictions….you are an member of the anti gun crew.
About inner city violence…you probably will never get to talk about it. Why would black inner city folks want to hear what you or I have to say about it?
Right now its a deflection from what you don’t want to talk about. Massacres aren’t being committed by black folks.
@Censored bybvbl
Her husband was calling the cops. The article explains why she called her husband.
And since the shooting was in self defense, why should we not defend her? Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if a local chips in to buy her a better weapon. Would you run out of the house with the criminal outside?
It is nice that you can second guess her so well while she was scared out of her mind, and you are sitting there safely behind your computer. Hindsight is 20/20.
LOGANVILLE, GA – A burglar in Georgia learned about a different kind of of Southern Hospitality after he broke into a woman’s home only to have the stay-at-home mom put five bullets into his face.
At around 1 p.m. Friday, a woman was at home with her two 9-year-old twins when there was a knock at the door. At first she thought it was a solicitor and ignored it. She became alarmed and called her husband at work when the person would not quit ringing the doorbell.
Her husband instructed her to take their children and hide inside a crawlspace that adjoined her office while he called 911. By this time, 32-year-old Paul Slater had made his way into the home after prying open the front door with a crowbar.
Read more: http://www.dreamindemon.com/2013/01/07/paul-slater-woman-shoots-home-intruder-times-face/#ixzz2HbAVU2az
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57562397-504083/georgia-mother-hides-children-shoots-intruder-5-times-during-home-invasion-police-say/
Authorities said the woman took her twin 9-year-old children to the attic as the man broke into their house with a crowbar. He reportedly busted open the front door and gave chase when he heard the woman call out to her children.
Investigators said the man chased the family into a crawl space near the attic, and when he opened a door the mother opened fire, striking him five times. He then stumbled out of the house, got into a car and crashed into a tree line in an attempt to flee from the scene.
OK, he got shot. He was in her home. Who has a problem with that?44Just sign me off as part of your anti gun crew….ooops make that crowd.
@Moon-howler
“Background checks have not prevented any of the high profile cases.”
Would there be a high profile case if it were prevented?
Ah…thanks
When I was writing about “high profile” I was talking about the mass killings. Not one was prevented by a background check.
But, I see what you’re saying. But then, the same can be said for every “mass shooting” that has been prevented by a gun owner.
have any mass shootings been prevented by gun owners?
There was a huge airplane crash on the American Canadian border. Where were the survivors buried?
@Cargosquid
She has a rather large house and I’m sure it has a back or side door. It’s not an isolated rural site.
Which is smarter – taking your children out the door with the phone in hand or hiding in the attic with the only egress being past the intruder?
I couldn’t say since I was not there. She obviously did not expect him to chase or look for her. Who knows why she did not retreat? No one has asked her. Perhaps he was coming in and she was already upstairs and to get to the back door, she would have had to go past him. I haven’t seen the layout of the house, where she was, the time line, etc. I will not second guess her.
At my home, that would depend upon a couple of conditions. Personally, I will take the action that I feel best protects me and mine at the time. It may not BE the best action, but one does one’s best.
The last I have read/heard/ etc you have the right to blow someone’s brains in if they come in your home and you feel that your life is in danger.
Why is this not working? Did I miss something?
@Cargosquid
I wonder what her reaction would have been prior to her husband taking her to the range to practice shooting. Without a gun, she probably would have fled. Now, regardless of whether she’s prosecuted (and probably won’t be), she’ll have to live with her decision. If the intruder dies, she’ll get to second guess her decision. Additionally, his family may sue. He is heard pleading on the 911 tape.
I’d rather lose a tv, pricey piece of pottery, or coin collection than shoot someone if I had an option. Insurance will cover the crapola but I wouldn’t want the annoyance of a trial. Guns bring out the simplistic cowboy solution in too many people.
@Censored bybvbl
She did flee, just not where you think that she should have. The gun just gave her another option to being injured or dying if found. Hiding in a closet in or near the attic is not a cowboy solution. He could have robbed them blind, but, instead, sought her and the children out. At least she’ll be alive to second guess herself. I won’t do it.
While I don’t even play a lawyer on TV, I don’t think that his family can sue nor do they have grounds. He was still alive and able to walk away.
I, too, have no cares about losing items to a burglar. My rules of engagement are based upon whether an intruder comes towards the bedrooms at our end of the house, especially if I’m able to inform the of the fact that they should leave.
Guns are nothing more than tools that provide options in an emergency.
@Cargosquid She only had two choices here. She could have fled to the outdoors, knowing that with her children in tow she would have every opportunity to outrun the intruder, who would never think to pull a gun on her or her children to force her into the house. The alternative is that she should just have allowed herself to be raped and killed at the hands of the intruder, right in front of her children. Enough of your cowboy histrionics, dude. It’s much better to be dead than to have to second-guess or go to court.
While I applaud her for defending herself, and her children – the fact that she unloaded all 6 shots, and her husband (who was not there) can be heard on the phone saying ‘shoot him again’ and that the husband could hear the victim pleading for mercy – may not help – if the victim gets a good lawyer.
Oh, was the intruder armed? I hadn’t read that.
I bet if George Zimmerman had it to do over again, he’d have stayed in his car. Playing cowboy can be costly – more than just monetarily.
If a man breaks into my home with a crowbar, I’m pretty sure I’m not going to politely ask him if he has a gun. He probably didn’t just accidentally wander into my home for afternoon tea.
If a man continuously rings my doorbell, then walks to his car to retrieve an object before returning, I’m pretty sure I’m not going to stay in the house when there’s an opportunity for me to get out with my children. I’m not going to stick around hoping I can out-Rambo him when I can walk to my neighbor’s for afternoon tea.
Well, it’s good that you were there to witness exactly what was going on.
There is no sane conversation to be had with regard to scenarios. You can’t write a script that will apply to all. The majority of people with guns are probably responsible. It seems a shame that Nancy Lanza didnt use trigger locks for some of her arsenal – the ones she only used at ranges. If she had he might have only gotten his hands on one or two weapons only. They only cost five dollars.
I keep missing the basic story line here.
I don’t think anyone can say with certainty what they would do or wouldn’t do under a stressful situation of some mad idiot braking into you home. I would probably empty all 6 rounds into him also. I would want to make sure …absolutely sure. If I had to go to court…well…that isn’t right but it beats being dead and not having the opportunity. However, we are talking about one person, not a classroom full of 6 year olds or students at tech or movie goers.
This is why we ALL have to be in the conversation and not allow anyone to silence us [looking at Cargo]. Some of us might want to limit your toys to ranges or not let you have some of your hearts desire. We might be right, we might be wrong…but lets have the conversation without getting all militant and strident over vocabulary.
The answer is not going to be more armed people. That isn’t ultimately going to solve the problem. Why? Who are the good guys and how do you tell before it is too late. This is circular logic.
Hopefully the American people are no longer going to play. good guys and bad guys went out with cops and robbers.
Defense plans precautionary cutbacks
By Craig Whitlock, Thursday, January 10, 6:34 PM
The Pentagon will impose a freeze on hiring civilians, slash operating costs on military bases and take other immediate steps to trim spending in preparation for the possibility that Congress will fail to reach a deal to avert billions of dollars in additional cuts, defense officials said Thursday.
A memo released by the Pentagon Thursday instructs the armed forces and defense agencies to curtail spending on training, travel, office expenses and conferences. It also gives officials the authority to fire temporary workers.
The hiring freeze alone could have a significant impact on the economy in the Washington region. The Defense Department employs about 800,000 civilians worldwide, but many are concentrated locally.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/defense-plans-precautionary-cutbacks/2013/01/10/b8824e90-5b6a-11e2-95d2-c7e9f0ba96c8_story.html?hpid=z2
I suppose the question really becomes, is the budget needed or is it all fluff and posturing? If it isn’t needed in peacetime (which I am reminded is only the brief time between wars) then it should ease down gradually so as to not impact any particular areas negatively.
@Lyssa
Absolutely! I still can’t figure out why that woman had the firearms in her house at all since she knew his mental condition. Or, at least, kept them in a safe with a combination.
@Moon-howler
This is why we ALL have to be in the conversation and not allow anyone to silence us [looking at Cargo].
OH FREAKING BS! I have not even attempted to silence you or any other person. I ENCOURAGE discussion and will defend my positions. I challenge any person on this blog to show where I have attempted to silence anyone, at anytime. I refuse to accept this accusation. Just because you get frustrated by my challenges to your statements does not mean that I’m attempting to silence you. The idea is ludicrous on its face in the internet age and especially on the owner’s blog.
You do want to silence those of us who don’;t agree with you. You discredit what we say because we don’t use the terms you want us to use. Therefore we have said nothing.
Your circular logic frustrates me. All this prevention talk is circular. If it didn’t happen than it isn’t a massacre.
If I have to use your words to make a point, then that is an attempt to silence.
“…but lets have the conversation without getting all militant and strident over vocabulary.”
“The answer is not going to be more armed people. ”
Apparently you’ve had the conversation and decided how it must be. The public seems to disagree. Firearms and supplies are disappearing off the shelves at a record pace, This past December saw over 2,000,000 NICS checks alone. And the NRA has gained 100,000 new members in the last 18 days.
How do you tell the good guys? 99.996+% are the good guys, as proven by the crime statistics.
@Moon-howler
Actually, they are in places like Chicago. The massacres just take place over a longer time period.
Is this a real question about preventing mass shootings or sarcasm? I can think of at least three just off the top of my head.
Clackamas Mall: just in the last couple of months.
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
Instead of listing individual ones, here’s a list.
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/mass-killings-stopped-by-armed-citizens.html
And the perfect example of who needs standard magazines for their semi-auto rifles, pistols and shotguns: http://www.humanevents.com/2012/12/23/when-assault-weapons-saved-koreatown/
I believe the question was asked what to do about inner city violence? Different day different dollar.
Yes guns are a problem in inner cities. That isn’t whats on the table at the moment. One thing at a time.
The Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control said the agency has seen retail sales increase to record levels consecutively for the past 14 years, even as discussions continue about privatizing the state’s liquor stores. The agency that runs more than 335 shops said it saw a record profit of $132.1 million in the last fiscal year and has contributed $1.7 billion to the state’s general fund during the last five years
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/3/alcohol-sales-deliver-record-profit-virginia/#ixzz2HgDUSkif
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
@Moon-howler
The reason that I brought it up is that inner city gun violence is directly related to discussions of gun control schemes. If one is trying to stop more violence, then that subject cannot be excluded because its not the “cause du jour.” All of it is interconnected.
Inner city gun violence usually has a totally different objective than mass murder.
Perhaps those working on this problem will discuss it. I will not because of the reasons I have stated.
@Moon-howler
Ah, I see. You are separating out the crime of mass murder from other murder, while I was not. So, your solution for the crime of mass murder is to punish the rest of the class for the actions of a small fraction of the populous. Even though gun control does not work. Let’s examine ALL the possible causes. Were these shooters on drugs? Were they mentally disabled? As you’ve said, we need to reform the mental health system.
I find the word gun control offensive. There is no such thing as gun conrol.
I want some restrictions. I don’t want to punish.
You say gun control does not work. I bet you if Mrs. Lanza had to keep her weaponry at her range in their vault her toad son wouldn’t have shot up a school full of people. He might have had to go in with a hammer.
I think those restrictions might have worked, don’t you?
We need to take a comprehensive approach. That would include mental health issues. I would start by making everyone who wants to own an assault rifle take a basic psyche test to see what the hell is wrong with them.
@Moon-howler
Oh…now there’s ANOTHER phrase that’s offensive. So, I guess we’re not supposed to use it. This is how liberals argue. They ban phrases and words as offensive. Well, I find gun control to be offensive, and the laws being called for ARE gun control. “Restrictions,” especially the ones that you have advocated here, ARE GUN CONTROL.
“You say gun control does not work. I bet you if Mrs. Lanza had to keep her weaponry at her range in their vault her toad son wouldn’t have shot up a school full of people. He might have had to go in with a hammer. ”
And yet, her rights to KEEP and BEAR arms would be restricted. She SHOULD have removed them…I would have applauded that if she did it voluntarily. As I’ve said before, I blame her almost as much as I blame the son….and if he WAS as insane as some say, maybe more, because he had no control. But, lets say you are right. In THIS case. It would not have prevented any of the others. And having them kept an an armory prevents them from being used for other purposes…or are you allowing them to be removed so that they be used outside of the range…as they are millions of times per year?
“to see what the hell is wrong with them.”
….and now we’re back to why there should be no mental health “exams” to exercise a right. You were sounding very reasonable until that last sentence and proved why 2nd Amendment supports are right in standing firm.
You are the one telling ME that there is no such thing as an assault weapon. I wasn’t banning words until you goaded me. You obviously fail to recognize my sarcasm.
I think the term gun control is an unproductive term because it gets everyones dander up.
Since we’re talking about standard sized AR magazines and the control of them, why hasn’t David Gregory been arrested yet?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/jul/1/miller-dc-arrests-vet-arrested-unregistered-ammuni/
Maybe this guy should sue to have his conviction overturned and sue them for wrongful prosecution.
This is what happens with draconian gun control.
We’ll get ya on the side of good, sooner or later. Maybe the NRA could offer free trigger locks or discounts on safes. But for them to cross their arms do nothing and collect dues borders immoral.