JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
2,499
Reactions
2,870
The Tide Is Actually Against Increased Gun Control
In spite of the frequent pleas from President Barack Obama and other national Democrat leaders for increased gun control, the United States is no closer to implementing such laws in spite of constant headlines pointing to mass killings and calling for more government action. This reality becomes all the more clear as many in law enforcement openly push against the call for more gun laws and average Americans treating the situation like a call to arms.

Following the attacks by terrorists in Paris, the Police Chief in Detroit, Michigan surprised the media by announcing that armed citizens are making Detroit decidedly unattractive to terrorists. According to CBS Detroit, because "more guns, fewer problems. That, at least, is Detroit Police Chief's James Craig's view of Detroit and fears about a possible terrorist attack." The article goes on to state, "Detroit's police chief says he believes the fear that armed citizens would return fire serves as a deterrent for a potential terrorist attack in the rust belt city."

This is a theme Chief Craig has promoted for quite a while. In 2014 it was reported in the Washington Times that "Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies than it did last year, and Police Chief James Craig is crediting armed citizens for the drop. 'Criminals are getting the message that good Detroiters are armed and will use that weapon,' Chief Craig, who has been an open advocate for private gun ownership, told The Detroit News in an interview. 'I don't want to take away from the good work our investigators are doing, but I think part of the drop in crime, and robberies in particular, is because criminals are thinking twice that citizens could be armed.'"

Craig is not the only law enforcement official pushing against the gun control narrative. Ulster County New York Sheriff Paul Van Blarcum has gone even further, advocating for all people with carry permits to keep their guns on them. The Sheriff, who is a Democrat, recently wrote on his office's Facebook page: "In light of recent events that have occurred in the United States and around the world I want to encourage citizens of Ulster County who are licensed to carry a firearm to PLEASE DO SO."

Although it is new to see those in law enforcement be vocal in maintaining such positions, it has long been known that the consensus of most police is a desire to see more responsibly and legally armed citizens. The website, PoliceOne, did an extensive survey of 15,000 officers to determine law enforcement attitudes about gun ownership, and the results will likely surprise most people. According to the survey, "More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable." Furthermore, a "full 86 percent feel that casualties would have been reduced or avoided in recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora if a legally-armed citizen was present (casualties reduced: 80 percent; avoided altogether: 60 percent)." Even more surprising is law enforcement's view of what should happen in public school when it comes to protecting young people, with "more than 81 percent of respondents were in favor of arming teachers and school administrators if they were properly trained and vetted or at least proficient."

Law enforcement is not the only one not accepting the anti-gun rhetoric. Average Americans are responding to mass shootings by purchasing more guns. For many, the obvious fact that all of these events are happening in "gun free zones," makes it very logical that they want to assure their own protection wherever possible. Furthermore, we are seeing contrarian attitudes about gun free zones, as the President of the largest Christian University in the US has <broken link removed> to carry guns on campus and the Texas Legislature has passed a law requiring the state's public institutions of higher learning to allow those who are properly licensed to carry guns.

Rhetoric by politicians and the media are at an all time high, but the trend is actually very much against more gun control laws
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-price/the-tide-is-actually-agai_b_8743924.html
 
Link: http://www.ammoland.com/2015/12/new...aholic&utm_medium=email_this&utm_source=email

The BBC and Mother Jones said there were more than one mass public shooting a day in the United States. They lied, of course, but it is important to understand how and why. Here are the facts.

My friends in Canada say the news there is really pushing That BBC and Mother Jones CRAP..:eek:

Along with this...."Justin Trudeau says we should create harmony by learning Arabic" :confused:
 
One interesting side effect of "kids" playing first-person shooter video games for the last decade or two is that this generation doesn't see guns as these scary, menacing death machines like the folks who supported Clinton's AWB. Yes, guns can kill people but they can't do it without some idiot operating it. Nobody has ever been killed by a gun sitting in a safe, drawer or holster without some other force (or person) acting on it.

His Royal Wetness continues to babble on and on about how guns are the problem and HE is the only one who knows best (and the rest of us are just morons). It only shows that this is a religious war and his religion is Gun Control. For a "constitutional scholar" he is either the most ignorant "scholar" in history or he knows exactly what he's doing and doesn't give a rip if it's legal or not. He's been told he is the smartest guy in the room for most of his life and now he believes his own legend.

We did our social experiment with the AWB and it didn't do dick. Now, the adults have decided that being armed is the only way to protect you and yours and Obama, Blumy, Mom's, Gabby and the space cadet and all the rest can lecture us all they want. When they give up their armed protection I might consider listening (probably not).

None of their policies effect them (financial, health care, gun control, etc.) so they can go pound sand.
 
Seeing how well our Government has PROTECTED us against the Radical Muslim attacks and every day crime.

Even the SHEEP are realizing we ARE ON OUR OWN! With Lots of Sheriff's telling people to arm them selfs and be aware.

Just hope as they do buy their guns they will join the NRA or OFF so they can keep defending our 2A!!!!!
 
The BBC and Mother Jones said there were more than one mass public shooting a day in the United States. They lied, of course, but it is important to understand how and why. Here are the facts.


I don't want to be defending MJ - but their current list for 2015 is 4 mass shootings
which was updated to include San Bernadino.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

I would paste a summary, but it is a spreadsheet and our forum just won't handle those -
lots of data at the link.



Other people say more than one / day - including members on NWFA.

The 1/day include family killings - typically reported as murder suicide
1/day also includes gang - gang killings


What defines a mass shooting?
Shot and killed or just Shot?
Does it involve a so-called suicide, perhaps suicide by cop?
How does it differ from a spree shooting?
Do gang shootings get included, or are they separate?
Should they be looked at differently if the participants knew each other - typical in gang shooting and family shootings?
Should terrorist actions be included?

What I think most people think of are situations like UCC - where a gunman targets innocents and gets at least 4 of them.

Does anyone's list include when police shoot and kill at least 4? Like Waco in the past year?

I have lots of questions.


I don't think it does us, the Firearms community, any good to spread fear.
 
"The Tide Is Actually Against Increased Gun Control"

I believe this is true also. Yeah, Bloomberg can buy a few politicians, but how many people actually get prosecuted under his new laws? Think of all the people getting disobedience training... Maybe we should thank Bloomberg!

The gun prohibitionists are also losing their core constituencies. More and more newbies are buying AR-15s, and a lot of them are liberals. It's becoming acceptable on that side of the aisle to defend oneself. This is a huge long-term problem for the prohibitionists.

Finally we are looking a debt-fuelled economic crash in the face. When that happens, are people likely to give up their guns?

Gun control is dead. The corpse just doesn't quite know it yet.
 
Gun control in not making any progress at the national level. The anti's know this and are focused on the liberal states to make progress there. We saw this here in Oregon this year and Bloomberg is buying off our elected officials for the coming legislative session. I am afraid that we are about to become Northern California.
 
People are starting to realize that it dose not matter what laws you have in place. Gun Control dose not work. France has had 2 mass shootings, and then a mass shooting in the middle of California and the answer the president gives them is more restrictions on guns. it took a few years but people are starting see through the twisted perception he has.
 
While the tide may be against....


When will the momentum be gained to undo what has been done? You know, roll back stupid bubblegum laws!
 
While the tide may be against....


When will the momentum be gained to undo what has been done? You know, roll back stupid bubblegum laws!

My hope is that enough people in Oregon will wake up and see what their votes have done to our state, and give us the majority in the house and senate in 2017 to do just that - roll back the bubbleguming laws. That really is our only chance. I hope we have some good strong pro-gun candidates willing to run all over the state - we desperately need them, just as we desperately need all pro-gun people to vote pro-gun in the next election cycle. I know that's hoping for a lot, I just hope my fellow Oregonians don't let me down yet again :(
 
Usually, the pro-gun candidates want to throw kids in jail for smoking pot, or something equally stupid. Unfortunately there are few actual pro-liberty people running for office, so sorry, I won't be supporting any more candidates. Nor do I support the fantasy of "representative government", which is just a fraud.

Sorry, I have to let you down. I don't think liberty depends on politicians. I don't care what they do in the legislature.
 
Unfortunately there are few actual pro-liberty people running for office,

I don't think liberty depends on politicians.

I agree with these 2 bits of your post.

The rest of it reinforces my belief that most who are pro-Liberty are too often non-participants. You share a widely held belief that your vote amounts to nothing -- for what ever reasons.

How do we get those who share those views back in the voters booth?

I am not ready to give up on liberty, nor on our representative government.
 
Wondering what we'll see in the upcoming session. Brown has vowed that she will enact laws that prevent another event like the UCC shooting. What comes to mind is Ceasefires so called Charleston loophole. Has nothing to do with the UCC event, but since she's made a commitment to do something, can see it on the radar as something she'll be pushing. The other thing would be the terrorist watch list. From a simpletons point of view, it's an easy match. Just ask why anyone would object to giving guns to terrorists. Of course it's a deflection and irrelevant, but that won't stop the libs.
 
Wondering what we'll see in the upcoming session. Brown has vowed that she will enact laws that prevent another event like the UCC shooting. What comes to mind is Ceasefires so called Charleston loophole. Has nothing to do with the UCC event, but since she's made a commitment to do something, can see it on the radar as something she'll be pushing. The other thing would be the terrorist watch list. From a simpletons point of view, it's an easy match. Just ask why anyone would object to giving guns to terrorists. Of course it's a deflection and irrelevant, but that won't stop the libs.

Attempting to buy any gun they don't like, magazines over one round, and bulk ammo like a 50 round box of .22 will put you on the "terrorist watch list", which would then exclude you from making the purchase. They won't be banned, you just won't be able to purchase them.
 
If you aren't on some government list by now, you are pretty worthless.

Folks, if they put this kind of squeeze on, their bill might as well be called "The Black Market Enhancement Act of 2016"...
 

Upcoming Events

Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top