Area gun sales, fears rising

Area gun sales, fears rising

There are 7566 comments on the North Port Sun story from Nov 14, 2012, titled Area gun sales, fears rising. In it, North Port Sun reports that:

Gun stores in Charlotte County have experienced increased sales since Election Day as local gun owners brace for an anticipated restriction of gun laws following the re-election of President Barack Obama.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at North Port Sun.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4498 Feb 6, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>Nope. It's pure observance. I've noted liberals and their actions my entire life. There is no such thing as a stopping point with them when they get in power.

You see, Democrats get their power from victims. The more victims you have in America, the more Democrat voters you have. They don't like people defending themselves because people who take care of themselves are not victims, and therefore, not likely to vote Democrat.

So we take most of the guns away from citizens thus empowering the criminal element. When the criminals have more power over us, then we become victims--something Democrat politicians drool over.

This is not about school shootings or gun restrictions really. it's about getting people more dependent on the federal government and their players.
Precisely.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4501 Feb 6, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>Every time it's tried. Gay's, smokers, environment, you name it. They say they only want X, and when they get it, they're happy for a short while. But when they become sad again, they go after getting Y and then Z.
Example, don't ask don't tell.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4502 Feb 6, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>Okay genius one more time, anyone can and will be able to buy it as long as it's stored in a locker at the shooting range - which is where it belongs.
Explain how you have the right to make that decision for other citizens. Obama? Is that you? Is this another executive order?
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#4503 Feb 7, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Murder and all violent crime has been on the decline for the last couple of decades. Only a Democrat doesn't live by the rule "if it's not broke--don't fix it."
We've seen some pretty positive results as an armed society, and again, that means people are taking care of themselves without the mothering of the federal government.
The real problem in our country is brainwashing. Your politicians lead you on this belief that restricting clip size or assault weapons will be the answer we were looking for in regards to school shootings. Yet, because you are sheep, you never bother to think independently and ask yourself "Are any of these proposed regulations going to stop murder or school shootings?" Of course not. Why should you ask? They say--you do.
We conservatives are much more logical. We know that taxing the wealthy will not solve one of our economic woes. We know that banning assault weapons will not stop one shooting in America. We understand political expediency and the BS that comes out of politicians all the time.
Do as I say--not as I do.
lol! You must save this to use on a regular basis.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#4504 Feb 7, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Murder and all violent crime has been on the decline for the last couple of decades. Only a Democrat doesn't live by the rule "if it's not broke--don't fix it."
We've seen some pretty positive results as an armed society, and again, that means people are taking care of themselves without the mothering of the federal government.
The real problem in our country is brainwashing. Your politicians lead you on this belief that restricting clip size or assault weapons will be the answer we were looking for in regards to school shootings. Yet, because you are sheep, you never bother to think independently and ask yourself "Are any of these proposed regulations going to stop murder or school shootings?" Of course not. Why should you ask? They say--you do.
We conservatives are much more logical. We know that taxing the wealthy will not solve one of our economic woes. We know that banning assault weapons will not stop one shooting in America. We understand political expediency and the BS that comes out of politicians all the time.
Do as I say--not as I do.
The standard moronic explanation by the gun-a-holics crowd – everything is based on more guns, how said and pathetic. There have been lots of studies conducted why crime dropped sharply and unexpectedly starting in the 1990s. To no surprise, all studies pointing to more guns where conducted by rightwing think tanks, financed by the gun lobby! Independent studies, however, point to four primary factors: increases in the number of police presents, increases in the size of the prison population, the waning of the crack epidemic, and the legalization of abortion in the 1970s.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#4505 Feb 7, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain how you have the right to make that decision for other citizens. Obama? Is that you? Is this another executive order?
I don't but the public does ... the voters and taxpayers!!!!!!!!
What a concept eh?
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#4506 Feb 7, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! You must save this to use on a regular basis.
We may have a debt and spending problem but the real PROPLEM is the American-Household-Income-Prob lem!!!!!!!!!! So why are the GOPers worried about millionaires???
http://swampland.time.com/2013/02/04/the-most...

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4507 Feb 7, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>I don't but the public does ... the voters and taxpayers!!!!!!!!
What a concept eh?
Not to violate the constitution they don't! What a concept eh?
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#4508 Feb 7, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
We may have a debt and spending problem but the real PROPLEM is the American-Household-Income-Prob lem!!!!!!!!!! So why are the GOPers worried about millionaires???
http://swampland.time.com/2013/02/04/the-most...
I've scratched my head about that one too. But I agree we can move forward if the American household can move forward.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#4509 Feb 7, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to violate the constitution they don't! What a concept eh?
.. which is why conservatives want to change it.

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#4510 Feb 7, 2013
“Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.”
Martin Luther King Jr.

“Reduce immigration levels”

Since: Dec 06

Kings Mountain, NC

#4511 Feb 7, 2013
The ONLY Gun Law We Need
http://patriotaction.net/forum/topic/show...

Another stupid Liberal
Dem Rep: 2nd Amendment Leads To People Owning Nukes, Submarines
http://patriotaction.net/video/video/show...

“Reduce immigration levels”

Since: Dec 06

Kings Mountain, NC

#4512 Feb 7, 2013
Hilarious! A collection of Obama Skeet-Shooting Photo-shopped pics from around the net! MUST SEE!
http://patriotaction.net/forum/topic/show...

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#4513 Feb 7, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>.. which is why conservatives want to change it.
Exactly what part are conservatives trying to change?? Please point out the part of the USC or the BOR that gives the govt the power to infringe on the 2nd Amendment.
rider

Gwinn, MI

#4514 Feb 7, 2013
The militia movement is a United States subculture consisting primarily of disaffected, rural, white, right-wing Christians who believe that the Federal government's authority is either broadly abused or outright null and void. The movement was mostly active in the early-mid 1990s, and appears to be making a comeback as of 2012, though it is not as powerful as it was at its peak.



[edit] Well regulated?They draw their name from the "well-regulated militia" clause of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution[1], and are ideologically rooted on the right wing of the political spectrum, usually libertarianism and/or paleoconservatism. While the militia movement does experience plenty of cross-pollination with white nationalists, anti-Semites, and other elements of the radical right, most observers view this as secondary to the movement's chief ideology — indeed, during the movement's height in the '90s a number of black separatist groups took up the ethos of militias[2], and today it attracts a large number of pro-Israel Christian Zionists who see the Jews as allies against the "coming global jihad". The militia movement is heavily associated with, and infused with, survivalist rhetoric about impending economic collapse and societal breakdown.

Many of these groups conversely view themselves (or frame themselves to the public) as groups of citizens organized and ready to be called on by local government when needed, and that private citizens' militias such as theirs were the "original intent" of the Founders for national defense and assistance with local law enforcement. This is a half-truth. While it is true that, historically, government agencies (from the local sheriff to the state) have called upon private citizens during times of emergency or temporarily deputized private citizens, and most state constitutions include definitions of the "unorganized militia" as all adult males (usually between a certain age range, 18 to 45) for this purpose, it is a leap of logic to conclude this sanctions the formation of private paramilitary organizations not organized by nor recognized by the government. The concept is "all adult males", not a private group of people holding decidedly fringe views proclaiming themselves "the" militia.

Besides conspiracy theorists and survivalists, the movement also attracted a heavy admixture of whackers and mall ninjas during its heyday in the '90s, although most of them left once it became clear the movement was also a magnet for dangerous anti-government paranoids like Timothy McVeigh.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Militia_movement
Besara

Des Moines, IA

#4515 Feb 7, 2013
rider wrote:
The militia movement is a United States subculture consisting primarily of disaffected, rural, white, right-wing Christians who believe that the Federal government's authority is either broadly abused or outright null and void. The movement was mostly active in the early-mid 1990s, and appears to be making a comeback as of 2012, though it is not as powerful as it was at its peak.
[edit] Well regulated?They draw their name from the "well-regulated militia" clause of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution[1], and are ideologically rooted on the right wing of the political spectrum, usually libertarianism and/or paleoconservatism. While the militia movement does experience plenty of cross-pollination with white nationalists, anti-Semites, and other elements of the radical right, most observers view this as secondary to the movement's chief ideology — indeed, during the movement's height in the '90s a number of black separatist groups took up the ethos of militias[2], and today it attracts a large number of pro-Israel Christian Zionists who see the Jews as allies against the "coming global jihad". The militia movement is heavily associated with, and infused with, survivalist rhetoric about impending economic collapse and societal breakdown.
Many of these groups conversely view themselves (or frame themselves to the public) as groups of citizens organized and ready to be called on by local government when needed, and that private citizens' militias such as theirs were the "original intent" of the Founders for national defense and assistance with local law enforcement. This is a half-truth. While it is true that, historically, government agencies (from the local sheriff to the state) have called upon private citizens during times of emergency or temporarily deputized private citizens, and most state constitutions include definitions of the "unorganized militia" as all adult males (usually between a certain age range, 18 to 45) for this purpose, it is a leap of logic to conclude this sanctions the formation of private paramilitary organizations not organized by nor recognized by the government. The concept is "all adult males", not a private group of people holding decidedly fringe views proclaiming themselves "the" militia.
Besides conspiracy theorists and survivalists, the movement also attracted a heavy admixture of whackers and mall ninjas during its heyday in the '90s, although most of them left once it became clear the movement was also a magnet for dangerous anti-government paranoids like Timothy McVeigh.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Militia_movement
You and Peter Citron ran pretty tight back in the day too.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#4516 Feb 7, 2013
Fed Up wrote:
Hilarious! A collection of Obama Skeet-Shooting Photo-shopped pics from around the net! MUST SEE!
http://patriotaction.net/forum/topic/show...
That's priceless!
Anyone else notice in the "real" photo, that Obama is holding the butt of the gun too high on his shoulder? Does clavicle fracture ring a bell? Also despite smoke exiting the barrel and ports, there is no pellets, wad/cup, or recoil. I want one of those recoilless over and under shotguns. I bet Obama's shoots 25 times before requiring a reload.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#4518 Feb 7, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to violate the constitution they don't! What a concept eh?
The 2nd amendment can be interpreted both to provide an individual right to keep arms or it could be interpreted that it doesn't provide an individual right but, as we know, the Supreme Court has gone with the first. As ALL amendments are NOT absolute the second is no exception. We can argue over the degree of regulation but to argue that it is “absolute” is ridiculous especially if the "best” weapon we can get our hands on is an ICBM. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that regulation of arms is permitted, indeed it is stated, in the 2nd amendment. The basis of that "regulated" is directly derived from a reading of Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Papers in which he is speaking of the character of a "well regulated militia"!

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4519 Feb 7, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>The 2nd amendment can be interpreted both to provide an individual right to keep arms or it could be interpreted that it doesn't provide an individual right but, as we know, the Supreme Court has gone with the first. As ALL amendments are NOT absolute the second is no exception. We can argue over the degree of regulation but to argue that it is “absolute” is ridiculous especially if the "best” weapon we can get our hands on is an ICBM. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that regulation of arms is permitted, indeed it is stated, in the 2nd amendment. The basis of that "regulated" is directly derived from a reading of Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Papers in which he is speaking of the character of a "well regulated militia"!
The Second is the exception to that! Name one other right provided in the constitution or bill of rights that contains,"shall not be infringed".

That's right Spocko! BURN!

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

#4520 Feb 7, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Any proof son?
Or is it your opinion as usual?
Yes you dont shoot skeet at that angle..........ROTFLMAO

But what do you expect from a moron that claims this..........LOL

.
.
.
.
.Here Is One wrote:

<quoted text>
Please post a link that shows that???
Would you like the link again that proves you wrong???
Burden of proof is on the prosecution
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrimproc_p...

Yea wrote.
lol! Nope. Don't need to son.

That's the defense's job. Even a dumb person would know that!

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.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min Incognito4Ever 1,275,269
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 24 min Ari son of Anarchy 193,570
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Rogue Scholar 05 196,953
News Carol Shea-Porter Files to Run Again in New Ham... Aug 26 zenduane 1
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) Aug 26 IB DaMann 34,463
News Ted Cruz: If the government shuts down over my ... Aug 26 By a vote 1
News Debbie Wasserman Schultz declares 'anchor babie... Aug 25 Andrew 29
More from around the web