"gun scare" what if?
Critical Thinking

East Bernstadt, KY

#66 Feb 22, 2013
WillyP wrote:
<quoted text>
So you don't consider BCM, Olympic, and Larue up to the standards of Bushmaster, Stag, and DPMS?
I said etc. I just got tired of thinking and listing. I didn't even include Armalite which I personally believe is the best quality factory AR out there. The better ones are the custom lowers and uppers that you complete the build on yourself. My point is, these manufacturers have not said they will no supply the government. I don't think they will because if the civilian market goes, they have nothing else.
Critical Thinking

East Bernstadt, KY

#67 Feb 23, 2013
The majority of police departments in the United States use Glock, Smith and Wesson, Ruger, and Beretta as a duty weapon. Almost all backups are Ruger, Smith and Wesson, and Glock. That's the majority it's not all. Military sidearms are generally Beretta, Sig and H&K and of course you will have a few still carrying a 1911, Colt if they can get it but a few Springfield and Kimber are there as well as are probably some less popular brands. Colt Manufacturing and Fabrique Nationale Manufacturing Inc. currently provide M-16's and M-4's. Most Police use AR's are actually Bushmaster because they are a little cheaper, nothing to do with quality. Stag does well because it provides the lefty police with firepower. DPMS has made inroads into police contracts. Black Hills sells ammo to the military and the police and actually SF guys mostly use Black Hills ammo. Remington sells both shotguns as well as their version of the sniper rifle and they also sell ammo to government agencies. Hornady, Winchester, and Federal to mention a few also sell significant amounts of ammo to the government. I don't see any of those names listed, but when I do I'll start to be impressed. Larue and Olympic and Doublestar (a KY company I beleive) do not impress me as they have no significant sales to lose by refusing to sell to the government. The only real name I see there that is impressive to me is Barrett but there are so many copies of that out there that I don't believe they're selling much to the government. You don't even see McMillan up there even though they do have government contracts and after they made so much fuss over Bank of America.
WillyP

Bowling Green, KY

#68 Feb 23, 2013
repubs lack brains wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are gun dealers. They aren't gun companies. They don't manufacture guns. It doesn't impress me that some gun crazies own gun stores. That's a logical thing to expect. If a gun store which hasn't ever done business with the Federal government in the first place says they aren't going to it's not exactly going to impress anybody. Those are only gun stores and army surplus stores. Not gun manufacturers.
BCM and Olympic will be very surprised to discover they don't manufacture guns. BCM makes AR15s that are one of the best if not the best made anywhere. Larue makes the best components available for M4s. Their optical mount is so good there really isn't a second choice for those who's lives depend on them.
Merrill

London, KY

#69 Feb 23, 2013
repubs lack brains wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are gun dealers. They aren't gun companies. They don't manufacture guns. It doesn't impress me that some gun crazies own gun stores. That's a logical thing to expect. If a gun store which hasn't ever done business with the Federal government in the first place says they aren't going to it's not exactly going to impress anybody. Those are only gun stores and army surplus stores. Not gun manufacturers.
You might fare better to do a little more research ol simple minded one instead of spewing your crap.You actually have a company on that list that is less than 100 miles from London and they manufacture guns.Several models in fact including AR-15's.Also others on the list are gun manufacturers as well.Uninformed people like you are the main reason the US has the current POS in office that we do.

Since: Sep 09

o------------><-----------o

#70 Feb 23, 2013
Pertaining to the manufacturers on the list, it isn't surprising that some of you are once again saying the Government and American people should bow down to corporations. We went through all this before the last election. Corporations should not rule our Government (Federal or State).

Naturally some gun companies which make assault rifles are not going to be happy about a ban on them. But this is solely about profit to them, not the safety and lives of people. They couldn't care less about that. It's only about money.

The other things on that list are most likely only gun equipment shops which my guess would be has never had a Government contract and never will. The word 'Tactical' isn't reassuring as to them being anything other than gun nuts selling and putting dangerous things onto our streets. Things no normal person or homeowner would ever want in their homes or to use to protect themselves.

Back to the manufacturers on the list. I had to look them up to know who they were and what they make. So these are not major companies.
Well

Louisville, KY

#71 Feb 23, 2013
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles ... that we are unable to think about reality."
-- Bill Clinton, USA Today, 11 March 93, pg. 2A
"The last time I checked, the Constitution said 'of the people, by the people and for the people'. That's what the Declaration of Independence says."
-- Reuters News Agency
** Note: actually those words are in neither of those documents, but part of The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln
"We are taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns [to ban]"
-- Jose Cerda, Los Angeles Times, 22 Oct. 1997, Mr. Cerda was named as a White House Official who specializes in gun control
"Gun registration is not enough."
-- Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, Associated Press 10 Dec 1993
"I want to make it as hard as possible. Gun owners would have to be evaluated by how they scored on written and firing tests, and have to pass the tests in order to own a gun. And I would tax the guns, bullets and the license itself very heavily."
-- Jocelyn Elders, U.S. Surgeon General, Mother Jones magazine, Jan/Feb '94
"Armas para que?" ("Guns, for what?")
-- Fidel Castro, a response to a Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns, after Castro announced strict gun control in Cuba
"I have made it considerably tougher for residents to get handgun permits."
-- Joseph McNamara, Police Chief, San Jose, CA, in his book Safe and Sane, 1984
"The second article of amendment (Second Amendment) to the Constitution of the United States is repealed."
-- U.S. House Joint Resolution 438 introduced 11 March 1992 by Congressman Owens, D-NY
" ... we could tax them [firearms] out of existence."
-- Daniel Patrick Moynihan, U.S. Senator, Washington Post, 4 Nov 93
"If it were up to me we'd ban them all [firearms]."
-- Mel Reynolds, U.S. Congressman, CNN Crossfire, 9 Dec 93
"We're going to have to take this one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of all guns- is going to take time ... The final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal."
-- Nelson T. Shields III, Founder of Handgun Control, Inc., New Yorker Magazine, p. 57-58, 26 Jul 1976
"There is no personal right to be armed for private purposes unrelated to the service in a well regulated militia."
-- Sarah Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control, Inc., Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 Jun 97, pg. 6
"We must reverse this psychology (of needing guns for home defense). WE can do it by passing a law that says anyone found in possession a handgun except a legitimate officer of the law goes to jail-period!"

Do you think people such as Sarah Brady have given up on taking guns ..er toys to protect ourselves. Is that a fantasy?

Critical Thinking

East Bernstadt, KY

#72 Feb 23, 2013
I don't think she's given up but I think she wants the fight to go on and on. The Brady Bunch had what they claimed they wanted, which was getting rid of gun shows. They did that with the waiting period, then they pushed for the instant check, which put gun shows back on the map and something for the Brady Bunch to fight over. The executive of the NRA and the Brady Bunch make fortunes lobbying with other people's money over different ends of the gun spectrum. They probably have lunch together everyday. There is no idealism, there is no cause, there is only money.

Since: Sep 09

o------------><-----------o

#73 Feb 23, 2013
Well wrote:
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles ... that we are unable to think about reality."
-- Bill Clinton, USA Today, 11 March 93, pg. 2A
"The last time I checked, the Constitution said 'of the people, by the people and for the people'. That's what the Declaration of Independence says."
-- Reuters News Agency
** Note: actually those words are in neither of those documents, but part of The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln
"We are taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns [to ban]"
-- Jose Cerda, Los Angeles Times, 22 Oct. 1997, Mr. Cerda was named as a White House Official who specializes in gun control
"Gun registration is not enough."
-- Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, Associated Press 10 Dec 1993
"I want to make it as hard as possible. Gun owners would have to be evaluated by how they scored on written and firing tests, and have to pass the tests in order to own a gun. And I would tax the guns, bullets and the license itself very heavily."
-- Jocelyn Elders, U.S. Surgeon General, Mother Jones magazine, Jan/Feb '94
"Armas para que?" ("Guns, for what?")
-- Fidel Castro, a response to a Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns, after Castro announced strict gun control in Cuba
"I have made it considerably tougher for residents to get handgun permits."
-- Joseph McNamara, Police Chief, San Jose, CA, in his book Safe and Sane, 1984
"The second article of amendment (Second Amendment) to the Constitution of the United States is repealed."
-- U.S. House Joint Resolution 438 introduced 11 March 1992 by Congressman Owens, D-NY
" ... we could tax them [firearms] out of existence."
-- Daniel Patrick Moynihan, U.S. Senator, Washington Post, 4 Nov 93
"If it were up to me we'd ban them all [firearms]."
-- Mel Reynolds, U.S. Congressman, CNN Crossfire, 9 Dec 93
"We're going to have to take this one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of all guns- is going to take time ... The final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal."
-- Nelson T. Shields III, Founder of Handgun Control, Inc., New Yorker Magazine, p. 57-58, 26 Jul 1976
"There is no personal right to be armed for private purposes unrelated to the service in a well regulated militia."
-- Sarah Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control, Inc., Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 Jun 97, pg. 6
"We must reverse this psychology (of needing guns for home defense). WE can do it by passing a law that says anyone found in possession a handgun except a legitimate officer of the law goes to jail-period!"
Do you think people such as Sarah Brady have given up on taking guns ..er toys to protect ourselves. Is that a fantasy?
Who is attempting to ban all guns? No one. This is about the ease criminals and mentally unstable people have in obtaining them.
Well

Louisville, KY

#74 Feb 23, 2013
___Jenny___ wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is attempting to ban all guns? No one. This is about the ease criminals and mentally unstable people have in obtaining them.
If you read my above post in its entirety, there are clear indicators that many of these people would abolish all guns if it were politically feasible. Some of these comments are several years old but do you think the desires and motives of these people have changed? I don't. These people know that to propose an outright ban of firearms would be met with such hostility that even the most modest of firearms regulations would be rejected. I wish you were right but occasionally these people reveal their true agenda which is to get rid of all private ownership of firearms.
IMO

London, KY

#75 Feb 23, 2013
___Jenny___ wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is attempting to ban all guns? No one. This is about the ease criminals and mentally unstable people have in obtaining them.
It must be fun to be young,naive,and still living in la-la land thinking you can change the world.I have lived long enough to know how things get started.All you have to do is look around and see that most times things do not happen all at once.It happens a little at a time.Step by step,minute by minute,day by day.Gov ernment is never satisfied it always needs more from its citizens.Once you realize you have been had and those in power were lying to you its too late.You are no longer a citizen with rights.You become a subject to be treated as they see fit.They continually add new laws to control you and take more of your money and rights away.Another problem today is many educating our young people (especially in colleges) see nothing wrong with the government and liberal media doing anything they dang well please in order to control everything and promote any damn cause that comes down the road.In fact in many places they promote it.I have experienced it and seen it.Then I got thrust out into the real world and had to see things the way it really is instead of the warm fuzzy environment some educators and government leaders want the masses to believe.There are enough gun laws on the books if the [email protected] in the federal government would prosecute those that fail the background checks and keep the criminals in jail longer.
Critical Thinking

East Bernstadt, KY

#76 Feb 23, 2013
___Jenny___ wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is attempting to ban all guns? No one. This is about the ease criminals and mentally unstable people have in obtaining them.
Jenny,

You seem to be somewhat politically astute but a little naive. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced a bill to ban specific guns going forward but not if you already legally own them. The bill is designed to placate people like you who own Glocks but think they are not targeted so the bill is okay. You don't like so called "assault weapons" anyway, so it's fine even though your model of Glock is specifically targeted as are all Glocks. But Feinstein has specifically said her plan is to ban all guns, so this is just a step. It's a "win the hearts and minds" campaign. I have all the guns I will ever need and more, so her bill should not bother me at least in her mind. So, now we see bills introduced by Missouri, and Oregon that really tighten the screws. In each case, the state legislator(s) introducing those bills mentioned being encouraged by Feinstein's bill and wanting to do something in their state since her's is unlikely to pass. Oregon has since dropped it's bill just to give you an idea of the power of the gun lobby. I think it lasted less than a week. I doubt that Missouri or will pass anything because it's too much at once. The anti-gun lobby strategy is to take baby steps until they get what they really want.

You criticize the NRA. I'm not a member although I do occasionally contribute. I think Wayne LaPierre is overpaid and would just as easily lobby against gun rights if the money had been there. Sarah Brady has become a paid lobbyist so she does not want to give that up. Keep in mind, it didn't bother here until she suffered personal loss. Anyway, the NRA for better or worse is one of the most powerful lobbies in the country if not the most powerful. It's membership is generally annual and it swells in times like these and shrinks when there is no deemed threat. The NRA strategy is to not give any ground at all. Basically, the NRA has to take that stance otherwise they would soon find that the baby steps they took backward has backed them against the wall. The NRA did not create the latest craze in gun purchases. The Sandy Hook shootings and the known response did that. That goes to show you that the American will to protect the second amendment is alive and well. Personally, I hope the Democrats maintain their stance but I suspect they will not. They know the mid-terms will take the Senate and Solidify control of the House if they do. Then we put up with more gridlock for two years. I had much rather see gridlock than destructive politics.

Since: Nov 08

Corbin Ky.

#77 Feb 23, 2013
Critical Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>
Jenny,
You seem to be somewhat politically astute but a little naive. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced a bill to ban specific guns going forward but not if you already legally own them. The bill is designed to placate people like you who own Glocks but think they are not targeted so the bill is okay. You don't like so called "assault weapons" anyway, so it's fine even though your model of Glock is specifically targeted as are all Glocks. But Feinstein has specifically said her plan is to ban all guns, so this is just a step. It's a "win the hearts and minds" campaign. I have all the guns I will ever need and more, so her bill should not bother me at least in her mind. So, now we see bills introduced by Missouri, and Oregon that really tighten the screws. In each case, the state legislator(s) introducing those bills mentioned being encouraged by Feinstein's bill and wanting to do something in their state since her's is unlikely to pass. Oregon has since dropped it's bill just to give you an idea of the power of the gun lobby. I think it lasted less than a week. I doubt that Missouri or will pass anything because it's too much at once. The anti-gun lobby strategy is to take baby steps until they get what they really want.
You criticize the NRA. I'm not a member although I do occasionally contribute. I think Wayne LaPierre is overpaid and would just as easily lobby against gun rights if the money had been there. Sarah Brady has become a paid lobbyist so she does not want to give that up. Keep in mind, it didn't bother here until she suffered personal loss. Anyway, the NRA for better or worse is one of the most powerful lobbies in the country if not the most powerful. It's membership is generally annual and it swells in times like these and shrinks when there is no deemed threat. The NRA strategy is to not give any ground at all. Basically, the NRA has to take that stance otherwise they would soon find that the baby steps they took backward has backed them against the wall. The NRA did not create the latest craze in gun purchases. The Sandy Hook shootings and the known response did that. That goes to show you that the American will to protect the second amendment is alive and well. Personally, I hope the Democrats maintain their stance but I suspect they will not. They know the mid-terms will take the Senate and Solidify control of the House if they do. Then we put up with more gridlock for two years. I had much rather see gridlock than destructive politics.
You got this statement right, "the American will to protect the second amendment is alive and well". The legal paperwork is being done for the next march on DC, it will call for the arrest of those elected officials who are quilty of treason.

Facebook has a large following on this coast to coast, they are even calling for it to be an armed event. I believe it can be done but it will take at least a million or more concerned citizens to make this showing as "we the people". I am planning on going and just in case I have made my will,lol.
Swimmer

London, KY

#78 Feb 23, 2013
Sounds like a bunch of rednecks arguing about guns. Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Hey

Louisville, KY

#79 Feb 23, 2013
Swimmer wrote:
Sounds like a bunch of rednecks arguing about guns. Hahahahahahahahahahaha
You'll fit right in.
real

Pella, IA

#80 Feb 24, 2013
crow wrote:
i saw this on facebook and copied it hope the original author
is ok with this "reprint."
I start off with the facts. I am an not highly educated man. I live in Rural Kentucky. I do not follow politics or ballgames. I AM a father of two young daughters, and for their future, their protection I have been listening to the "proposed gun ban and laws." One thing that I read and do not know if it is a fact. That during this what I will call a "gun and ammo scare" Obama struck a cord with Americans making the sales of Pistols, rifles, and ammo, higher than all recorded sales combined in the past.(Correct me if am wrong) This "gun scare" was started by a conterversal "shooting" As if we had none of those in the past.
After Obama's last address to the nation, he proposed NO BAN on any guns. After ALL they Hype. Not even one gun banned? This struck me as odd.(but happy!)
The thoughts rolled around in my head as I had gun fever also and was part of the "gun scare." I now own 2 more guns directly becasue of this and stock pile of ammo to go along with the 20 or so rifles and pistiols my family and I already have.
Then a week after obama speaks, it just so happens that North Korea started "test fireing" Nucular weapons....
Here is the question. Most of us thought (and most still think) that Obama is failing his task as leader, but what as this "gun scare" about? another messup of his? OR NOT!?
It is said that the USA has the largest Armed Forces and highly trained men and women in the world. Yet when was a war fought on USA soil?(not civil) As I said before I am just a man with his eyes and ears open, and what this Redneck sees is brilliant but also causes a scare, as if "they" know something we don't.
So USA has the largest, many would say most powerful Armed Forces... Question is WhY did obama start this "gun scare?"
Take a look around, at your buddies, your wives, your children, even the Anti-gun yuppy neighbor, you have down the road who "swore" he would never own a gun...but now has a safe full.
What did Obama's "gun scare" do???
He armed his nation of citizens with the guns and stock piles of Ammo.
So now we the United States of America, not only has the top quality trained armed forces, but also a highly supplied households of men and women ready to defend their own ground.
This all still leaves me with the question. Why? What do they know that we do not?
At the least we all know we are locked, loaded, and training!
DROPPING KNOWLEDGE...

Why? What do they know that we do not? Think tanks cover 99% of all possibilities. That doesn't leave much for any mistakes, from our mis-leaders. Along with several plus-angles for each and every problem-reaction-solution scam they promote, IMHO only. One angle on gun-c could be to arm the citizens for when TSHTF, then let the citizens thin out the population themselves, after awhile the government steps in, saving whats left of the all the grateful citizens while gathering the guns from all the cold/warm dead hands, protecting US from us. Whad a great cuntry, yeah right! Evil is the desire for control over others.

Someone once said we are only milk cows, the IRS is the milking company,,, the United States Inc. is the vet/farmer who takes care of and culls the herd,,, Great Britain is the Owner of the farm in fee simple. The farm is held in allodium by the Pope, the vicar of the world.

In other words, the IRS is the collection co.,,, the US is the military power,,, Great Britian is the financial power and Rome-Pope is the religious power,,, TOTAL CONTROL...

It's people, that are good or evil, not guns.

“speak your mind!”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#81 Feb 24, 2013
___Jenny___ wrote:
<quoted text>
So, not only are you seeking to control women's rights (from another thread), and a racist (from still another thread, yes, I remember you saying things like 'you blacks'), but now you want the government to seize control of the press (music companies, movies, etc) and freedom of speech. Even if there possibly is a reason for wanting to do something about violence in video games, music, movies, etc ..... where is the line in violating rights and freedoms? The right of music artists to produce their music. What's next?
It's a very dangerous thing to mess with Freedom of speech. Very dangerous.
I love how conservatives and religious drumbeaters scream about 'their' rights and freedoms while time after time demanding freedoms be taken away from everyone else.
wow,you have so much passion for freedom of speech. you say where is the line, where is the line drawn on all of our bill of rights? if you want to come on here and start preaching about the first you need to preach all of the bill of rights! you also need to quit with the two party game..... mine is better than yours.....mines doing this.......yours is doing this they both are responsible for bending the people over.they both are responsible for violating the peoples rights.bush, obama,congress, senate,dems,and repubs are responsible for violating our bill of rights! you along with other party brainwashed idiots get on here saying your parties chit doesnt stink, the others do.when the reality is its two different piles of the same chit! i could only wish you and all the other party blind people would light a true fire of liberty under azz

“speak your mind!”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#82 Feb 24, 2013

“speak your mind!”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#83 Feb 24, 2013

“speak your mind!”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#84 Feb 24, 2013

“speak your mind!”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#85 Feb 24, 2013
im sure if you wanted to search around you would find other sites covering the above news!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Keavy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Lying Trump 20 min Farm_er 3
Laurel Cookie Factory -- what do you think? (Jun '08) 43 min circle of life 9,316
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 1 hr Patriot 153,604
Dino's Italian Restaurant CLOSED!? 1 hr Fyi 6
Nicole Pennington, mad alcomust 2 hr Dog gone 1
Felts' Music Place (Oct '08) 2 hr mother of two 92
Plumber 3 hr Ray ray 1

Keavy Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Keavy Mortgages