The Campaign For DA

2.22.2018

The NRA Is At CPAC And They Are Angry

I think this is in Deuteronomy:



This lady got roasted last night in the town hall at the arena I referenced earlier.





51 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your a fool Barry.

Anonymous said...

Dana Loesch is courageous. She stood up to a Satanic mob last night.

Anonymous said...

"There, I guess King George will be able to read that!"
-God

Anonymous said...

Second Amendment says you get to own a gun. Fine. The Constitution doesn't say anything about how many shells it has to contain. New federal law: Guns are free from your Federal Government. One per person. Pick a rifle, shotgun, or pistol. Only one. And these free guns will have the capacity of only one shell at a time. No modifications permitted. And the new guns will be calibers totally incompatible with previous weapons in circulation. And no old popular ammo calibers permitted either after the changeover. New system: everybody (except cops & army) have nice new guns with one shell. Daniel Boone did fine with a one shot rifle back in the day.

DF Radical Solutions

Anonymous said...

NRA will be branching out soon. Will now explain why cancer is good for you and a right of every true American not to be cured.

DF Circular Logic

Anonymous said...

Did the NRA spokesperson get her mad skills while taking Big Tobacco PR 101? Of course she has those two shining role models of Huck and Kellyann to follow in learning how to lose your soul while being an apologist for the most wretched man in the world.

DF Norman Vincent Peale

Anonymous said...

Why is she dressed like a pirate?

Anonymous said...

Go away N R A. Your time here is done.

Anonymous said...

I own guns but I am not a hunter or a
Member of the NRA. But with all the
piling on..... I think I’ll join.

Anonymous said...

1:23 - The 2nd amendment applied to muskets back then, it applies to Ar-15s now and it will eventually apply to some futuristic weapons.

A government with the power to disarm its citizens also has the power to exert tyrannical murderous force on its citizens.

Anonymous said...

1:32 is a deep thinker. She’s probably the smartest girl at her middle school.

Anonymous said...

I like it, all of us good folks out here will take out one liberal with each of our single shots, then we restore order, restore the nuclear family and restore our constitutional rights fully when you all are gone!!!

Anonymous said...

Loved it
Proud NRA member

Anonymous said...

12:58 -

*You're

Anonymous said...

"There are many grieving black mothers in Chicago and you don't see town halls for them, do you??"

Yeah, actually you do. Although it was on MSNBC, so you'd say it was "fake," the truth can be a bitch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw3B0eJBBbI

wordkyle said...

"Second Amendment says you get to own a gun" - Well, no. It acknowledges that we already have that right.

Anonymous said...

1:23,I'm sure all criminals will comply with your new laws.

Harry Hamid said...

The idea of being endowed with certain rights by our Creator is a legal fiction. It's the way we reason through the idea that our fundamental rights are not granted by the government. No one who is sane actually believes God granted endowed us with the right to own a gun.

This lobbying organization that has seized control of our government is loony and they're making gun owners look loony, which is a shame.

Anonymous said...

Superintendents making $200K - $400K and even more annual salary seems absurd. Cut their pay and use that extra money to put more police officers in each school.

Anonymous said...

I have to say that Loesch did better than I thought she would have. The other side has some good arguments, but they are still an emotional mob. But they are a mob with no influence yet, and the groundswell that they have going right now has to last and will take years to materialize into an effective organization. So Loesch's statements that they are all for "crazy" people not getting guns--that took some wind out of their sails. As did her looking at the sheriff and saying "they had all these complaints and could have Baker Act'd him to take away his guns, but didn't". And they're right--law enforcement could have done more with existing laws, and failed to.

But that still does not address the issues related to people using guns from family members, or first-offenders like in Las Vegas. No existing law will keep those from happening, and the NRA fights new laws left and right. And in fact, they have made it easier, not harder, for those with mental issues to get guns.

I'm encouraged by the way people have reacted to the Florida shooting. But they have to keep that anger going, if they want to beat the perpetual paranoia and money that the NRA has on their side.

Rage

Anonymous said...

"restore the nuclear family"

You forgot to sign your name, Mr. Gingrich



"Well, no. It acknowledges that we already have that right."

Wordkyle gets one right. The Constitution does not give us rights. We have those rights because we are human beings. The constitution sets limits on the government, not the people.

However--the second amendment, like every other amendment, can be reasonably regulated. That is where the gun nuts are most often wrong. You can't marry little kids as part of your religion, you can't use fighting words or slander someone, and your right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures has so many exceptions that they virtually swallow the rule. In the same way, there is no Constitutional prohibition against any one of several types of gun laws:

Registration requirements
More strict training requirements
Ban on weapons most often used to commit crimes (not a total ban on all guns--you can have a hunting rifle, but not pistol or assault rifle)
Requirements that guns be removed from homes whee there are threats (incompetent persons, persons with certain convictions or allegations of family violence, etc.)
Laws creating liability for people whose unsecured guns are used in crimes...


These would all survive scrutiny. The problem is that nobody has the balls to propose them in the states where they matter the most.

Rage

Anonymous said...

The constitution says you have the right to bear arms. It doesn't say one gun. Daniel Boone faced animals, and other men including Indians who were armed with bow and arrows. They also had knives and hatchets and other hand made weapons. That is why most pioneers knew how to fight with knives and hatchets. If you take guns away then those crazies out there will buy them on the Black Market. We need to make our schools as hard to enter as a prison. We need to do what our laws say about purchasing any gun. Lets protect our greatest asset, our children. How long did it take to put seat belts on school busses? It would cost to much! Do we put a price on our children?

Anonymous said...

Turn in your guns, then we will talk!!!

Anonymous said...

If you take away our guns how do we protect our families? America is a violent nation with millions of criminals walking the street, not Australia or Canada which had a much smaller problem with violent crime. You will never take my guns.

mzchief said...

Not a fan of Dana Loesch but I have zero problems with what she said. I don't understand Loesch singling out "white mothers" as a focus of "Legacy Media" because I've seen the grief of Black and Hispanic parents exploited by Media. However, I believe Loesch was spot on about media loving the ratings of any tragedy/catastrophe. Just how many times did the media really need to roll and reroll the video of people jumping out of the upper floors of the Twin Towers on 9/11?

There are currently 340+ MILLION registered guns in the USA. NO ONE can name/create any law that will assure ALL of those guns are out of circulation and out of the hands of criminals/crazies.

Here's the insanity of all the people demanding "gun law reform:" it's illegal for crazy people to have guns, it's illegal to commit murder, it's illegal to possess/discharge a gun in a "gun-free zone" and yet shooters think nothing of breaking those laws. What the anti-gun people fail to recognize, if well trained, stable people are armed there will be fewer if any nuts with guns in what were former "gun-free zones." In Israel, schools have teachers and administrators who volunteer to train monthly to be able to be armed on campus, just in case someone decides to attempt to shoot up a school. Guess what, in the past 16 years, there were two schools, in Israel, that were targeted by Palestinian terrorists.

The only thing that stops a shooter is the prospect of being shot at.

When you live somewhere it takes LEOs 20+ minutes to respond to your call for help because someone is breaking into your home then you might actually understand why Americans have the RIGHT to own guns.

Anonymous said...

You're

Anonymous said...

2:04pm - I look forward to having my ray gun strapped to my hip in that glorious future. Oh happy days!

DF Happiness is a Warm (Ray) Gun

Anonymous said...

Thought brilliant and having stood the test of time, or at least a couple hundred years of it; the authors of our constitution could not have envisioned what "arms" would mean today. An F-16 fighter jet is an "arm"...but apparently I don't have a "right to bear" one, now do I? How about a tank? Or a warthog? Just because it shoots bullets does not mean it's my right to own one.

Anonymous said...

If only seventeen babies were murdered the same day as the school shooting in Florida at Planned Parenthood, they would call it an extremely slow day!

Anonymous said...

Let me see if I understand correctly: We should abrogate citizens' rights based on allegations of misdoing?

Anonymous said...

What do all the school shooting have in common? Answer - social media. Social media has changed our world.

Anonymous said...

Rage, nice rant about nothing. None of your suggestions would have prevented any past shootings nor would they prevent any in the future.

I love how every time a shooting happens the media and the left place blame on an inanimate object. Blame is to be placed on “who” caused something. Nicholas Sanchez is the cause of the Florida shooting. The NRA didn’t cause nor are proponents of such shootings. Why don’t the parents of the victims or the media place any blame on the school? Why didn’t they have any security to prevent such a shooting? BYW: an AR-15 is not an assault rifle. Sheesh......boneheads!

SpanishWarDonkey said...

Scrutiny is the in the eye of the judge here. Those scary "assault rifles" are used in less than 2% of murders. The 2nd doesn't say jack about hunting; you're better than that argument. Let's ask why are kids killing their class mates.

Let's ask why the mass shooting numbers have increased 10x in the last two decades, but overall murders are still declining for almost 3 decades. Let's ask hard questions before we attempt to remove constitutionally guaranteed rights en masse. (I won't get into the actual logistics of such a task).

The only truely feasible approach (in my opinion) is keeping people from getting guns that shouldn't. As a gun owner that has to jump through hoops for special stuff, I also want some NFA rollbacks in exchange for whatever additional hoops I have to jump through later on. SBR laws are arbitrary and suppressors are never used in crimes due to their high entrance price. Let's talk real talk and maybe we'll get somewhere.

Anonymous said...

Hey boo bear, come and take it!!!

Anonymous said...

God given right for all Americans to have guns? Really? How many Americans are in prison right now? Do we go down to Huntsville and pass out pistols to all the inmates? Guess so...it's their "God given right" to have arms. What an idiot this nut is.

Anonymous said...

A good guy with a gun didn't stop the bad guy because he lacked courage. If a law enforcement officer is scared how will a teacher have the courage to face a shooter armed with a weapon of war?

More guns in schools is not the answer. Kids go outside at recess and ride buses. Protecting schools like protecting a bank as suggested by the NRA, is impossible. But Trump went for it. Say anything to avoid the elephant in the room "the assault rifle".

wordkyle said...

710 - First define "assault rifle."

Anonymous said...

6:05 - "What do all the school shooting[s] have in common?"

Uh... Guns? They took place at a school?

Perhaps I'm not understanding the question...

Anonymous said...

"Scrutiny is the in the eye of the judge here."

Well, no shit.


"Those scary "assault rifles" are used in less than 2% of murders."

Sure, but wouldn't saving 2% of the victims be worthwhile? And of course, I said "guns used most often in crimes..." Didn't say "bad all assault rifles". So, if you don't mind, please don't misrepresent my statements. You're better than Wordkyle, after all.


"The 2nd doesn't say jack about hunting; you're better than that argument."

Hell, I didn't say anything about hunting, either. Unless I]m missing something. But I suppose you're right, I'm better than the argument I didn't make and is entirely in your head.


"Let's ask why are kids killing their class mates."

Sure. And once we know, then what? Budget mental health fixes? How's that going in a Republican Congress? And let's not forget that NRA-sponsored legislation actually prevents government agencies from studying the causes of gun violence.

"Let's ask why the mass shooting numbers have increased 10x in the last two decades, but overall murders are still declining for almost 3 decades."

Excellent question. If only it weren't illegal for government agencies to actually ask it.

"Let's ask hard questions before we attempt to remove constitutionally guaranteed rights en masse. (I won't get into the actual logistics of such a task)."

I said nothing about "removing" anything. Regulating where targeted reasons exist to do so? Yep.

"The only truely feasible approach (in my opinion) is keeping people from getting guns that shouldn't."

Really? How about enforcing existing laws to take away guns from people who once bought them legally, but are now a danger? Because that's when these issues usually arise--after the guy already has the gun, and then makes threats. What is your solution (in your opinion) then?


"Let's talk real talk and maybe we'll get somewhere."

And yet your "real talk" ignores the greatest source of gun violence---people who already possess guns that they obtained legally and should now have taken away from them. People who make threats; people with later-diagnosed mental issues; people whose unsecured guns get used by a kid who shoots themselves or a little brother or sister; and guns owned by wife-beaters (studies directly link a gun in the home of an abused to the instances of gun-deaths in the same homes)...

Rage

Anonymous said...

"Let me see if I understand correctly: We should abrogate citizens' rights based on allegations of misdoing?"

In cases with the highest correlation between the accusation and a gun death? Yes.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Typical Nazi reply 2:08 you and your kind are the true vermin no dofferent than Isis or Taliban

Anonymous said...

As with other amendments it does not say it can not be regulated for the public good . Banning AR -15 type weapons does not mean you can’t own a gun , regulating type of ammo or amount does not mean you can’t own a gun, requiring a license or registration for not mean you can’t own a gun, passing a background check does not exclude you from owning a gun.

Anonymous said...

Arguing over the term assault is stupid ,call it whatever you want to jackasses . It’s a weapon designed to kill in a rapid manner capable of firing multiple rounds and reload quickly. From evidence recovered at the scene the school shooter was reported by police to have fired 160+ rounds in 5/6 minutes. That makes it a military style weapon at least and that’s where it belongs

wordkyle said...

1106 - "Firing multiple rounds and reload quickly" - Are there any firearms that do NOT fit that description?
And what do you mean "military style?" The military normally uses automatic weapons, which are VERY highly regulated in the civilian population.

Let's go ahead and also challenge your definition of a firearm - "a weapon designed to kill." It's a machine designed to fire a projectile. That's it. As with automobiles, microwave ovens, and electric massagers, it's the individual who decides what to do with it.

From what you've said so far, you don't seem to have a good grasp of firearms at all. Are you even aware of what it is you want to regulate?

Anonymous said...

anonymous at 8:45pm It's not a God given right but a constitutional given right. and for your info felons lose the right to own guns. There is big list of things they the lose the right to do. So when they have a weapon they are breaking the law. But when people don't obey the laws they are criminals.

Anonymous said...

WK, always trying to divert attention away from the issue. Get the guns off the streets. Ban assault weapons. Stop talking about arming teachers; it is the NRA plan to detract from passing sensible gun control laws.

The NRA donated 30 million to Trumps campaign. They are a political lobby group for gun manufacturers. If they can divert the public attention away from assault weapons killing kids at schools, blame it on everyone else while not taking any responsibility, nothing will be done and more kids will die.

A good guy with a gun is a myth. Arming civilians sells more guns. Young people know they have to stand up for themselves by demanding politicians stop taking political donations fro a gun lobby. They won't be distracted!

Anonymous said...

A hardened school is a building with no windows surrounded by a fence topped with barb wire, no trees, no scrubs, no parking lots. All sports fields would require fencing. In the city of Baltimore, schools have no working heat or air conditioning due to lack of 38 million in funding.

Teachers are under paid, retired teachers in Texas out of pocket health care expenses increased. Teachers have to pay out of pocket for pencils and paper.

The semi automatic AR-15 is the weapon of choice of school shooters, gun manufacturers manufactured increased production in 2016. Most guns are owned by 3% of the population. Arming teachers is how to sell more guns. The NRA wants hardening of schools and arming of teachers, refusing to support any reasonable restrictions.

Spending millions to harden schools won't stop a shooter armed with a semi automatic weapon because they will find another soft target. Profiling a kid on a pathway of violence and intervention is a better solution. Keeping a semi automatic weapon away from violent kids will make our kids safer at school.

Why some young men think owning a gun makes them more sexual, more powerful, more masculine is a society problem. Girls have been empowered by the women movement while some young men no longer know how to deal with their feelings. Perhaps they don't have good male roles in their lives, like the Florida and Sandy hook shooters.

wordkyle said...

343 - I believe the issue is you don't know what you're talking about. You can't define an "assault weapon." "Sensible gun laws" (along with their corollary "sensible murder laws") already exist, yet don't stop crazies from committing murder. Apparently law enforcement can't help us, as four armed sheriff's deputies waited outside the building while the killer murdered children.

Law enforcement had thirty-nine (39! Think about that) previous warnings about this killer, deputies waited outside during the killing, yet for some reason you've got a bug up your ass about the NRA. It's pretty clear you have an agenda that does not include how to keep crazy people from killing other people.

Since you keep trotting out the same ignorant arguments (where you can't even define the terms you use) then it appears you're simply repeating what you've heard others say, without understanding the words that come out of your own mouth. Do you think you're an effective spokesman for your point of view?

wordkyle said...

838 - This report is a few years old, but it reports in depth on 49 mass shootings from Columbine (1999) to January, 2013. The AR-15 was rarely used.

Also:
January 2016. The Orlando nightclub killer used a SIG Sauer.
April 2007. The Virginia Tech killer used a Glock 19.
December 2012. The Sandy Hook killer used a Bushmaster.
November 2017. The Sutherland Springs church killer used a Ruger AR-556.
November 2009. The Fort Hood killer used a FN Five-seven and a S&W .357.

Yeah, I cherry-picked these, and I know you specifically pointed out school shooters, but my point is that all kinds of weapons have been used by killers. Cherry-picking which weapon you want to vilify seems disingenuous. And let's not forget all the killings in Chicago, Baltimore, etc. which almost never involve semiautomatic rifles.

"Reasonable restrictions" already exist on guns. In the Florida shooting the authorities shirked their duty in an astonishingly disgraceful fashion. So much for the good more laws would have done.

Anonymous said...

WK wants us to believe law enforcement was to blame, not the fact a 19 year old mentally disturbed male was able to purchase a AR-15, not for hunting, for killing. If laws were in place allowing the family to get a restraing order or if the police had more power to commit a mentally violent person, the tragedy didn't have to happen.

Defying terms is how to control a debate, focus on that to avoid responding to the problem.

So you have two new laws that will save lives, both removing guns and preventing mentally disturbed violent people from having them. Seems more reasonable than more guns in schools or spending millions on hardening schools. A Republican from Georgia suggested, a plain clothes guard at every school entrance at school, not law enforcement, carrying a concealed weapon.

You know, depending on government for security, is for snowflakes, not for red blooded patriots!

wordkyle said...

511 - At least you abandoned your efforts to intelligently discuss firearms. What you said subsequently was still a mixed bag.

It's good that you focus on the shooter. The human pulling the trigger is the problem. Millions of gun owners don't kill people every day, so it's clearly not a machine problem. Violently crazy people should not be allowed guns, knives, baseball bats, or drivers licenses.

Ignoring the disgraceful abdication of duty by the deputies is either purposeful or blind. They had chances to prevent the tragedy, and the chance to end it sooner. Given their failure to do this important stuff, who are you counting on to enforce all the new laws you want?