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.
Monday is the one month anniversary of the murder of the children in Newtown.
@Moon-howler
I wasn’t banning the use of the word. I was pointing out that its use was inaccurate as the definition morphed per the politician. The rifle used in CT was NOT an assault weapon as defined by CT. How’s that for irony? The problem is with defining certain rifles as assault weapons and wanting to ban THEM while ignoring the fact that those rifles are no different operationally than any “traditional” semi-auto rifle, used for decades by Americans.
I did miss the sarcasm.
The reason that we gun activists demand that the words used are accurate is that, for decades, the gun control groups and the media (but I repeat myself) both lie and/or use gun terms inaccurately. They use whatever term will scare the public, inventing the term “assault weapon” was once such scam.
Josh Sugarmann, founder of the radically anti-gun Violence Policy Center, admitted this deception as early as 1988 when he said, “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the public support for restrictions on these weapons.”
And it worked. He knew that he could sway low information voters with fear.
And thus, we argue on the merits of accurate information. It’s not that I want you to stop using it. I want you to realize that if you do use it, its an inaccurate, political creation, created from lies and deception. The use of the term also is a legal term, and thus, should be as accurate as possible. What is an “assault weapon” in California is not the same as Connecticut or Virginia. As I said, the one in the massacre was NOT considered an “assault weapon.” Silly description for a rifle, isn’t it.
@Lyssa
Heh…. I’ve been saying that about the mother since day one.
The NRA already has discounts. By the way…have you noticed that the press…so quick to jump on the story, has said absolutely NOTHING about the condition in which those guns were stored? Maybe they WERE in the safe, and he was able to get them.
The NRA is not doing nothing. Its just that they are not doing what YOU want them to do. THEY didn’t do anything wrong, just like millions of other gun owners and gun organizations.
Cargo I’ve never before seriously endorsed a cause until this one. I am particularly insulted by the NRA’s saintly regard of the constitution. If the 14th Amendment doesn’t mean today what it meant in 1868 then neither does the 2nd. If the right to free speech has limitations so does the second. And so on. It doesn’t suit their needs or their wallet to look at the 2nd at all.
As far as home protection – manyy law enforcement I know recommend keeping a baseball bat as protection. Most people are on target with a bat. A bat and a phone can be your best defense. Keep your weapon next to the bat if you like.
I just saw this while researching for a quote:
From Moon:
You couldnt tell if anything was in it or not. At that point it was a piece of plastic. If waving plastic is a felony, we have a big problem.
We have a big problem. Possessing that bit of plastic and steel is a felony in DC and Gregory got away scot free because he’s connected. Anyone else would have been in jail and if it had been a conservative reporter doing that, the media would have called for his arrest. Welcome to the draconian gun control world.
obviously he was waving a piece of plastic…not using it as a weapon enhancer. You don’t know that he didn’t get a waiver.
Just out of curiosity, how do we know who is a conservative reporter?
My definition, a reporter should be value neutral and REPORT the news. That bothers me. Plus what you said sounds victimy and paranoid. If you aren’;t supposed to have a wavy piece of plastic then I guess you aren’t. I wasn’t giving the product a full look. That will teach me.
Who held the contraband?
Common sense tells me that this tool was being used to illuminate a discussion.
But if you want me to be the bad guy…have at it.
That’s kind of that sweeping disingenuous thinking that you don’t like when twisted around to work against you 😉
Here Moon. This is why I say that you advocate banning all semi-auto weapons.
I am all for people owning a revolver or a rifle or a shot gun. I am not for people owning weapons that can kill multiple people in seconds.
I just dont happen to think that everyone who wants to own a gun with multiple fire power should get to do so. I wold put everyone except felons and children on tier one. Everyone can have a revolver and a basic rifle.
Maybe those who want multiple round guns could just go to countries where that sort of gun is found on the street corners to use them.
Moon, I take back the statement that said that you advocated, in those words, “banning all semi-autos” since I cannot find it in the blog. I was certain that you wrote it. Instead, here are your words that indirectly call for the banning and strict restrictions on any semi-auto weapon. At least, since you don’t define the “tiers, ” I’m assuming that’s where you are putting those types.
You get insulted when I put you with Feinstein. Yet your statements mirror her intentions. Her list reads like the results of your statements. You don’t like the term gun control, yet that’s what you are calling for. Sorry…but its true. You’ve decided that its time for America to restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of innocent people because of this tragedy. And that’s your right. Its my right to oppose your ideas. And that is all I am doing. I’m sorry if you get offended, but you, along with others, are advocating for a fundamental transformation in the lives of millions.
From your statements, I get that you want to restrict ownership to revolvers, bolt action rifles or even lever action, and possibly pump shotguns. Then, after some sort of tests, citizens will be allowed by the government to have access to more modern weapons. And so on. You want mental tests on all people that want to exercise 2nd amendment rights, at least in regards to semi-auto rifles, considering them mentally unbalanced. And those rifles are to be held at the ranges, because that’s where you think all of them are shot and really…have no other uses. You consider that the respect for and exercise of the 2nd Amendment is just a game and that it has no value any longer, or at least, much lesser value than any other enumerated right.
You would rather have police officers and no other armed person in a school. You consider that teachers are fundamentally unsuited for the handling of arms for defense, and that armed guards are not qualified enough to do the job either. Hardening the schools is also a good idea. You would like more money and reforms to be injected into the mental health system. Perhaps media is also affecting these crazy people.
Have I covered your positions fairly? I may be wrong on some of the positions or details because someone else said it.
I do this because there seems to be some confusion between us as to my statements about your position and I don’t want to attribute claims, statements, etc to you that you do not support.
And to be clear, my position is that one madman’s criminal act does not give the authorities or my fellow citizens the right or authority to restrict the rights of innocent citizens. My position is that the Constitution protects my right to keep and bear arms, which actually predates the Constitution and is not dependent upon any government granting me permission to do so. I feel that Americans should be allowed the same arms as the police or the infantry, as regards to small arms. Current laws already place restrictions on types of weapons beyond semi-auto weapons and to whom weapons are allowed. Background checks are an infringement, but…is a compromise. The system could be improved to be less restricted in access. About the current crisis about school shootings, I think the politicians are panicking while gun control groups, politicians, and the media see this event as a political opportunity to advance their unconstitutional agenda.
My position on gun control comes from a study of it over the past few years. As it is currently designed by the various gun control groups….gun control does not work and endangers the law-abiding. In every place that it is practiced in America, gun crime is worse. When comparisons to other countries are done, the gun control people refuse to acknowledge the fact that one cannot compare apples to oranges and the fact that there are numerous cultural differences involved besides gun laws. Gun deaths should only be considered as a part of all deaths, murder, etc. Gun control is about control, not safety.
My debate with the language, while it may be annoying to you, is necessary. As I’ve said, the VPC, CSGV, Brady, etc. constantly misrepresent, cherry pick, use made up languange and outright lie to advance their agenda. When accurate legal descriptions are used, the ludicrousness of their positions is revealed. The laws advocated by them are either failures or infringements or both. The “assault weapon” is just a scary, made up, phrase by Josh Sugarman, of the VPC, to advance their agenda among voters with no knowledge of weapons. An assault weapon is defined by cosmetics only. It is identical to more traditional rifles in operation.
Another law that they love is the banning of private sales. And to enforce that, registration would be necessary, like in MA or NY. Registration is a deal killer as it always leads to confiscation.
But it all returns to the basic idea that an American citizen has the right to keep and bear arms. And the restriction of the free, lawful exercise of that right is wrong.
I know that he did not get a waiver because the police told him it was illegal and the the DA actually investigated. I agree with your definition of reporter. Unfortunately that type of reporter is rarer than hen’s teeth. A conservative reporter is one that does not kowtow to the narrative, usually from Fox or a blog.
I don’t want you to be the bad guy. It was obvious that he was illuminating a point. But the law is the law and other people have gone to jail for such things. He didn’t because he is a connected liberal. He was given a pass where you or I would not be.
What I said was victimy and paranoid? Paranoid in what way?
I don’t get your statement. What sweeping disingenuous thinking?
“…if it had been a conservative reporter doing that, the media would have called for his arrest. Welcome to the draconian gun control world”
How was that sweeping disingenuous thinking? Are you telling me that if Ted Nugent had done that in DC, he would not have been arrested and the press would not have called for his head?
Is not imprisoning a man for ammo inadvertently left in a bag and carried into DC or the possession of a magazine…NOT draconian gun control?
I still don’t understand your statement.
I dont understand who went to prison and why.
On another critical issue, Moon, where are you in Downton Abbey? I just finished episode 7 of Season 2. Poor Daisy!
Sorry, I had to have a tempter tantrum…I cleaned most of it up though…@Emma.
I finished Monday. I did watch Sunday night so I am caught up to speed. Ah…bring it on Sunday.
Do you watch Girls? I was fairly horrified at first. I might watch that other one Rick suggested. I am just basking in Downton Abbey right now.
Emma, did you watch the Forsythe Saga? I think that is how it is spelled. Start of netflix and finish out on amazon movies.
@Cargosquid
Just overly sensitive tonight I guess.
Well, for those that care, here’s part of the statement by the DC AG Nathan on his FAMILY FRIEND, David Gregory:
rvin Nathan, the attorney general for the District of Columbia, announced Friday that he will not press charges against NBC News’ David Gregory nor any employee of the broadcast network for violating the city’s gun laws. Violation of the city’s firearms laws carry a maximum $1,000 fine and one year in jail.
Mr. Nathan wrote to an attorney representing Mr. Gregory and NBC News, Lee Levine of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, LLP, that, “OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity of the violation of this important law, because under all of the circumstances here a prosecution would not promote public safety in the District of Columbia nor serve the best interests of the people of the District to whom this office owes its trust.”
This right here is why the average person does not trust politicians: OAG has made this determination, despite the clarity of the violation of this important law,
He violated the law and walked away due to his connections and friendship with the AG.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2013/jan/11/miller-david-gregory-gets-scott-free/
Laws are only for us little people.
He should be fined. It would make a point.
@Moon-howler
Haven’t heard of Girls.
I’m in the middle of reading The Forsyte Saga (I think that was one of Lyssa’s suggestions). It’s going to take a while. Good to know it’s on netflix. It’s a slow starter but seems to be well worth the read.
It’s worth the read and the time. So is the PBS produced Masterpice Theater film. I’m starting Evelyn Waugh – Brideshead Revisited.
@Lady Emma
If I recall, you get to see the first couple of shows on netflix and then they don’t have the third chapter. I had to go to Amazon to get it.
I was horrified that I got cut off in the middle. Netflix is famous for that.
@Lady Emma
Girls is on HBO This Sunday night at 9. How to describe it….3 young women who have graduated from college and have the maturity of a 7th grader. Maybe Rick will come along with a better description. Its raucus and inappropriate on some levels.
@Lyssa Brideshead Revisited was fantastic–I read that several years ago.
@Emma, whats it about?
Must see- 125 years of National Geographic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-geographic-at-125/2013/01/10/5d5d5d92-5b2f-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_gallery.html#photo=1
@Moon-howler It’s somewhat of a family drama that takes place around WWII instead of WWI like Downton. Like Downton, there are themes of family, class and nobility, and long-held traditions, but Brideshead has a bigger emphasis on sexuality and religion. Well worth the read, and you won’t ever forget the characters.
It sounds just like my cup of tea. Thanks for the referral. Is it a movie also?
It’s on Amazon Prime video.
Ah good. I love Amazon Prime. That is the best buy in America. I order everything from amazon. I even order tea and coffee from there.
@Moon-howler
I just gave away Nat Geo magazines from 1943 to the ….80’s I think to my history teacher. The house which we are selling for an estate contained them. She is creating a college history lab.
They were probably worth a fortune.
@Lyssa
It just got worse. I just learned that crimes in DC, like Gregory’s, are FEDERAL crimes. That was a federal judge. Therefore, because he decided that the possession of a 30 round magazine IS NOT a threat to public safety, even if it was a crime witnessed by thousand…. I think that the federal gov’t just lost any moral authority to declare a ban on standard sized magazines. Heheheheheheh….
Its actually a rather silly thing for us all to be honing in on. You are focusing on minutia. There are far more important things to concentrate on.
Why does a hobbyist need a 30 round magazine? Please explain.
That makes you happy?
@Lyssa
Yes. Remember…I’m the guy that doesn’t think that a box with a spring in it is a threat. I do thin that he should have been arrested because arrogance mixed with stupidity should hurt. In fact, every single person that possessed that magazine, and did not turn it into the police , broke DC law. You don’t think that HE bought that mag, do you.
Banning standard mags does nothing to solve a single problem. There are probably 20 million of them out there, looking identical to magazines with restrictions.
How can they look the same if one holds 3x more ammo? Just asking/
Well Cargo, what is the ONE thing that will solve the problem. I think there are several facets to this. Banning some ammunition, some weapons, requiring full backgrounds…but I don’t think being gleeful about impediments to resolve the problem is really what you mean. At least I hope not.
@Moon-howler
The restricted magazines have a block at the bottom. Less room inside.
@Lyssa
I’m not being gleeful about impediments to solve the problem as I don’t believe that a magazine ban would do anything to solve the problem. There is no one solution…but the only ONE solution that I’ve heard the politicians state is some type of restrictions on lawful, innocent Americans.
I’m gleeful whenever stupid, corrupt politicians demonstrate their hypocrisy and, if their opponents are smart enough, demonstrate their own weaknesses.
Either a standard magazine is too dangerous for the public and so, Gregory should be arrested…or its not.
And now for something completely different. Cosmology is upended. This is big. REALLY BIG. As in GINORMUS! STUPENDOUS! RIDICULOUSLY LARGE.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/largest-structure-in-universe-large-quasar-group_n_2455552.html?icid=maing-grid7|maing8|dl1|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D256429
There’s always the opportunity to move to Oklahoma before they secede.
not soon enough
Like “sooner”?!!
In Connecticut, Democratic Sen. Beth Bye wants to limit access to assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and require that firearms be registered by model and serial number, Reuters reported. Bye also wants to impose a 50 percent sales tax on ammunition and magazines.
Sounds like a good start. Note “limit” not “ban”. Registration sounds like a VIN number to me…
Well, her colleague wants to ban guns.
http://www.examiner.com/article/masks-off-anti-gun-end-game-connecticut
State Senator Edward wants that to happen by amending the general statutes to establish a class C felony offense, except for certain military and law enforcement personnel and certain gun clubs, for (1) any person or organization to purchase, sell, donate, transport, possess or use any gun except one made to fire a single round, (2) any person to fire a gun containing more than a single round, (3) any person or organization to receive from another state, territory or country a gun made to fire multiple rounds, or (4) any person or organization to purchase, sell, donate or possess a magazine or clip capable of holding more than one round.”
How is registering firearms going to stop what you want? The irony is that Connecticut already has an “assault weapon” ban and that the rifle used was NOT considered an assault weapon under that state’s laws.
If they want to impose a sales tax in CT on ammo and magazines, that’s their prerogative. There’s a great market soon to be forming just over the state line and there is always the internet.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/13/a-real-life-downton-abbey-affair.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_morning&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_morning&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet
Servants Hallby Margaret Powell
@Cargosquid
Many ammo shouldnt be sold over the internet.
Can you buy cigs and booze on the internet?
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/article1270387.ece
Eugene Patterson, one of America’s great editors, died yesterday,
but his writings will live on forever.
@Moon-howler
Actually, yes. In many places you can get wine shipped right to your door. Not in Virginia. The distribution tier system defeated that about 3 years ago.
Why shouldn’t ammo be sold over the internet? What harm does that do? And…what ammo? Are you thinking that certain ammo is more dangerous? I’m somewhat confused by your statement.
I didn’t make a distinction regarding ammo.
Which one of our recent killers had 6000 rounds with them?
@Moon-howler
Many ammo
This is why I thought you were making a distinction.
6000 rounds on them? None. Most of the killers that bought a lot of ammo found out that ammo is very very heavy and left it home. I WISH they had been carrying 6000 rounds of ammo. .223 ammo, which is what is used in most AR rifles: 1,000 rounds = about 28 pounds,
They wouldn’t have been able to walk, or at least very far. And they certainly would not have been able to move. The amount of ammo away from a shooter is as dangerous as a boat anchor.
I think some of it was in the home…maybe Aurora shooter?
@Cargosquid
Ah, Cargo, your brought back memories of my Infantry days when carrying a Basic Combat Load for the M-16. Between the four 30 round clips in the two ammo pouches on the belt, plus the bandoleers, I was carrying around 10lbs of ammo in addition to everything else.
Thanks for the memory…and the illusion of a boat anchor. Sometimes it felt like that especially when running!
@Ray Beverage
Now… imagine if you were carrying an M–14 and IT’S ammo load.
That’s why I joined the Navy. And I still got to shoot an M-14. But we had these big gray things to carry our ammo.
The Repugs are threatening to default on the nation’s debts, shut the government down and send the economy into recession if they don’t get their way. They are the party of the stupid people.
@Starryflights
The President is threatening our credit rating so that he can continue borrowing money without cuts.
The President feels that the debt limit has nothing to do with spending.
Personally, I think that they should ask for $1 in cuts for every $1 in debt increase.
Why is it that the President keeps threatening to default if the limit isn’t raised? Why is he scaring poor people and SS recipients with shutdown when he knows that monthly tax income is enough to pay those debts. All it takes is leadership and priorities. Oh. Wait. We know that he doesn’t have any of that.
WE should ask Senator Reid why voting against it in 2006 was ok but not now. He voted against raising it during 2006 during the war in Iraq.
Never mind. Just raise it….In fact, why put a limit on it?
Oh, and the law gotten broken AGAIN by the man that had the nerve to lecture others about the debt and spending. He STILL won’t have a budget by the legal deadline.
Starry, if I had more people like you in my life, I just might be swayed more to the left! I love how you reach out to seek common understanding with your thoughtful posts.@Starryflights
@Cargosquid
And we should ask why Senator McConnel voted to raise it back in 2006, along with most other republicans then and throughout the 8 years of Bush. None of you had problems with raising it then.
Actually I did. Nice how you can read minds.
Why do we have it, if we don’t use it?
The real world says you raise it. Cargo, I fear you live in a time warp of sorts.
The debt ceiling has been raised 75 times since WWII.
If the “real world” says that we raise it no matter what, then why have it all?
It’s a formality. Checks and balances formality.
I like the comedian Chris Rock’s idea on the mass murder issue- don’t ban anything, just tax ammo so that one round costs $5,000.00. No constitutional issue and END OF PROBLEM.