Gabby and Mark: The new Bradys of gun control

Jan 12, 2013 Full story: WTAE-TV Pittsburgh 105

Jim and Sarah Brady were loyal Republicans entrenched in Washington politics: she, the daughter of an FBI agent, and he, a Midwestern Eagle Scout.

Full Story
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1 Jan 12, 2013
BULLSHIT !! Gabby and her communist shit husband (navy trash) are antigun communists who live off the Govt dole. We have thousands of scum that come home from the military only to campaign to destroy our freedom. We have AK's and AR's because of the communist trash that is born and bred right here in America.

The Framers left us with a 2nd amendment so we can protect ourselves from Obama communists and Gifford navy traitors. Now you know why Loughner wanted to kill that political scum.

Since: Jan 09

Brooklyn, NY

#2 Jan 14, 2013
Sarah and Jim Brady were on TV the other day discussing the new push from gun regulations. Sarah seemed quite frail. They are up in years now and frankly I am not surprised there is a new generation is stepping forward. Of course I have yet to hear exactly what proposals the Giffords are putting forward. As of yet, they have not aligned themselves with the Brady Campaign.

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#3 Jan 14, 2013
Tory II wrote:
BULLSHIT !! Gabby and her communist shit husband (navy trash) are antigun communists who live off the Govt dole. We have thousands of scum that come home from the military only to campaign to destroy our freedom. We have AK's and AR's because of the communist trash that is born and bred right here in America.
The Framers left us with a 2nd amendment so we can protect ourselves from Obama communists and Gifford navy traitors. Now you know why Loughner wanted to kill that political scum.
They may realize how important the process is to keep assult weapons and high capacity magazines out of the hands of "cussing, hateful, paranoidand insane individuals.

Military type assult weapons and high capacity magazines only uses are to target practice and to HUNT PEOPLE and in some cases to SLAUGHTER CHILDREN!
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#4 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>They may realize how important the process is to keep assult weapons and high capacity magazines out of the hands of "cussing, hateful, paranoidand insane individuals.
Military type assult weapons and high capacity magazines only uses are to target practice and to HUNT PEOPLE and in some cases to SLAUGHTER CHILDREN!
Liar. The military does not buy semi-auto AR15s. No company lists an "assault weapon" in their catalog. No government agency that has AR15s list any "assault weapons" in their inventory. Parents "slaughter" their own children more than mass murderers. If you are going to comment at least know what you are talking about instead of making a fool of yourself.

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#5 Jan 14, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Liar. The military does not buy semi-auto AR15s. No company lists an "assault weapon" in their catalog. No government agency that has AR15s list any "assault weapons" in their inventory. Parents "slaughter" their own children more than mass murderers. If you are going to comment at least know what you are talking about instead of making a fool of yourself.
If you reread my post I did not say anything about "military semi-auto" weapons. In fact I was referring to military weapons deveoped for the battlefields by the military in which these assult weapons were copied, only not full auto, but with easy accessability and very little modification to the weapon it can be made fully automatic.

Now who is the fool?
Besara

Des Moines, IA

#6 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>If you reread my post I did not say anything about "military semi-auto" weapons. In fact I was referring to military weapons deveoped for the battlefields by the military in which these assult weapons were copied, only not full auto, but with easy accessability and very little modification to the weapon it can be made fully automatic.
Now who is the fool?
And yet how many stories have you read where a full-auto has been used in a crime?

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#7 Jan 14, 2013
Besara wrote:
<quoted text>And yet how many stories have you read where a full-auto has been used in a crime?
Not many, but the semi-automatic is what the "nuts" choose to use due to the simple fact they're easier to be had. With that said if these "nuts" could get their hands on "full-auto" they would most definitely choose those weapons.
MartinDupree

Latham, NY

#8 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>Not many, but the semi-automatic is what the "nuts" choose to use due to the simple fact they're easier to be had. With that said if these "nuts" could get their hands on "full-auto" they would most definitely choose those weapons.
No. You haven't heard ANY!! And obviously you know nothign of firearms or you would know that a large number of rifles used for hunting are semi-automatic and the majority of handguns are too. And you're wrong about the "full-autos" because you can't cite any recent crimes committed with one.
You just fall for politicians' buzz words.

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#9 Jan 14, 2013
MartinDupree wrote:
<quoted text>No. You haven't heard ANY!! And obviously you know nothign of firearms or you would know that a large number of rifles used for hunting are semi-automatic and the majority of handguns are too. And you're wrong about the "full-autos" because you can't cite any recent crimes committed with one.
You just fall for politicians' buzz words.
Why should I "cite" anything I'm not concerned with.

My concern is with assult type weapons that are used prmarily on two occaxions, to target practice and hunt other humans and these mentally deficient cowards seek out and kill babies!

And yes, you are wrong, I have always owned weapons and always will! Period!

And don't use the NRA's money grabbing propganda points that a person needs a thirty round magazine to keep >"THEM<" <{?} from knocking down your doors and taking your guns.

Just this morning at an antique auction I was reading a 1933 KKK pamplet where the NRA was proud to be know as the klans biggest supporter, and was spouting the same rhetoric back then! "They're coming after your guns"!
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#10 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>If you reread my post I did not say anything about "military semi-auto" weapons. In fact I was referring to military weapons deveoped for the battlefields by the military in which these assult weapons were copied, only not full auto, but with easy accessability and very little modification to the weapon it can be made fully automatic.
Now who is the fool?
You call it a military type weapon and it's not because no military buys them. You don't know crap about guns or you would know it takes a complete change of internal parts to make them full auto. Those internal parts are regulated and not sold at the local WalMart. I saw a copy of a hundred dollar bill once but that in no way makes it a hundred dollar bill. As for the term "assault weapon" NO company lists one in their catalog. NO government agency or law enforcement agency that has AR15s lists assault weapon in their inventory. Even the government does not call them "assault weapons" when they buy them. FOOL!
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#11 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>Not many, but the semi-automatic is what the "nuts" choose to use due to the simple fact they're easier to be had. With that said if these "nuts" could get their hands on "full-auto" they would most definitely choose those weapons.
2 murders with full auto since 1934 and one of those was a cop with a police issued gun.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#12 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>Not many, but the semi-automatic is what the "nuts" choose to use due to the simple fact they're easier to be had. With that said if these "nuts" could get their hands on "full-auto" they would most definitely choose those weapons.
Less than 3% of gun crimes involve an AR15.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#13 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>Why should I "cite" anything I'm not concerned with.
My concern is with assult type weapons that are used prmarily on two occaxions, to target practice and hunt other humans and these mentally deficient cowards seek out and kill babies!
And yes, you are wrong, I have always owned weapons and always will! Period!
And don't use the NRA's money grabbing propganda points that a person needs a thirty round magazine to keep >"THEM<" <{?} from knocking down your doors and taking your guns.
Just this morning at an antique auction I was reading a 1933 KKK pamplet where the NRA was proud to be know as the klans biggest supporter, and was spouting the same rhetoric back then! "They're coming after your guns"!
Liar. The .223 is a .222-.222magnum spin off. A round developed for varmint hunting (40lbs or less). 3,000,000 AR15s in this country have never killed anyone so are they defective?

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#14 Jan 14, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> 2 murders with full auto since 1934 and one of those was a cop with a police issued gun.
And?

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#15 Jan 14, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Less than 3% of gun crimes involve an AR15.
And?

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#16 Jan 14, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Liar. The .223 is a .222-.222magnum spin off. A round developed for varmint hunting (40lbs or less). 3,000,000 AR15s in this country have never killed anyone so are they defective?
Wrong again, the Bushmaster .223 caliber assult rifle. Dec. 14, 2012... A weapon used in the Shady Hook Elementary shooting was swmi-automatic rifle designed and deveopled for use use in combat and was first used in Viet Nam .
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#17 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>And?
You are a fool.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#18 Jan 14, 2013
CB can see both sides wrote:
<quoted text>And?
You are a lying fool.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#19 Jan 14, 2013
The .223 Remington (5.56x45mm) is a cartridge that is ballistically in-between its predecessors, the .222 Remington, and the .222 Remington Magnum. The .222 Remington aka the Triple Deuce/Triple Two/Treble Two is a centerfire rifle cartridge introduced in 1950, and was the first commercial rimless .22 (5.56 mm) cartridge made in the United States. The .222 Remington was an entirely new design, not derived from any previously existing cartridge The .222 Remington was introduced in the Remington Arms Model 722 bolt action rifle, and was an instant success. Factory rifles often produce groups of one minute of arc (0.3 mrad) or less with no tuning. The accuracy and flat trajectory of the cartridge resulted in the adoption of the round for varmint and benchrest rifles When the US military was looking for a new smallbore rifle cartridge, Remington started with the .222 Remington, and stretched it to increase powder capacity by about 20% in 1958 to make the .222 Remington Magnum. The greater powder capacity put the velocities between the standard .222 Remington and the 22-250. The cartridge was not accepted by the military, but it was introduced commercially. In 1963, the 5.56 x 45 mm, also based on a stretched .222 Rem. case, was adopted along with the new M16 rifle. The 5.56 mm cartridge had a capacity only slightly less (5%) than the .222 Rem. Mag. The new 5.56x45mm cartridge was commercialized by Remington, the .223 Remington. Given the close performance to other cartridges and military acceptance, both the .222 Remington and the .222 Rem. Mag. faded quickly into obsolescence, being replaced by the .223 Remington.
Tray

Saltillo, MS

#21 Jan 14, 2013
Semi-automatic AR-15s for sale to civilians are internally different from the full automatic M-16, although nearly identical in external appearance. The hammer and trigger mechanisms are of a different design. The bolt carrier and internal lower receiver of semi-automatic versions are milled differently, so that the firing mechanisms are not interchangeable. This was done to satisfy United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) requirements that civilian weapons may not be easily convertible to full-automatic.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

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.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 2 hr Edmond Pulpo 12,053
Texas open carry is shooting itself in the foot Tue Independent1 4
Open Carry Activist Charged With Shooting Ex-Hu... Dec 13 Here Is One 3
Ferguson braces for grand jury decision Dec 11 Vern5554566 4
Deer Hunting Time Dec 9 kurtcooksalot16 1
Bill would stiffen background checks Dec 8 Independent1 3
SAFE Act PROTEST draws crowd in Lewis County (Jun '13) Dec 7 lowville resident 4
More from around the web