Opinion Column: Blood on hands of Obama, Mitt and NRA!

Standing at Holmes’ side as he unleashed an AR-15 assault rifle and a shotgun and a handgun was Wayne LaPierre, political enforcer of the National Rifle Association.

Standing at Holmes’ side as he sprayed bullets and buckshot into a crowded movie theater were Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, a President and a would-be President, who have bowed to the NRA’s dictates and who responded to the slaughter Friday with revolting, useless treacle.

[...]

Every Aurora-like spasm provokes the question: How did the killer get his guns? Overwhelmingly, the answer is that he acquired them legally from a licensed dealer under the permissive laws of the local jurisdiction and the deliberately porous oversight of the federal government.

So-called Liberals who support Obama pay attention:

Obama postures as supporting a new assault weapons ban but has done exactly nothing to restore the prohibition. Nor has he moved to close the loophole that allows for gun purchases without background checks at weapons shows.

In righteous anger, Obama should have confronted the NRA’s political might regardless of polls that show a strong sentiment against restoring the prohibition.

All you pro-gun anyone-but-Obama Romney-supporting "Conservatives" pay attention also:

So, too, Romney, who was no less saccharine than Obama in discussing Aurora and is no less craven on gun control. As governor of Massachusetts, he signed a state assault weapons ban and defended tough anti-gun statutes. Then, as a presidential candidate, he joined the NRA and has since professed fealty to the group’s positions.

(Source article)

Now I know this thread may make me somewhat unpopular on this forum, especially with all the hype lately on here about this being a false flag operation to institute a weapons ban and a signing of a UN gun control treaty. I really could care less.

In all the hype and conspiracy theories people are losing sight of the VICTIMS. Much like in other tragedies, most recently Jared Loughner's rampage in Arizona last year, the victims were killed by a weapon that for all intents and purposes SHOULD be illegal in the hands of American citizens. Had it been illegal and he still went on his rampage the death and injury toll would have been much lower. At best he would have been in possession of legal handguns that only have, at most, a 16-round clip.

Holmes, Loughner, Klebold, Harris, et al., were not in possession of illegal weapons so there is no evidence to suggest that if these weapons had been illegal they would have sought them out on the black market.

I'm all for responsible gun ownership. I own guns myself. Hand guns. But there is absolutely no reason that someone needs to own an AR-15 assault rifle.

People say "Blame the shooter, not the gun" or "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." I call b.s. I blame both the shooter AND the gun because, as I stated, without access to those kind of guns this tragedy wouldn't have been near as bad. And guns do kill people. People kill people with guns!

Oh god, the guy in your avatar makes me sick. I just love how now Muslims are playing the victim card, when its the oppressive and murderous actions of Muslims around the world that have made people cautious.

Also this article is complete crap. The only blood on anyone's hands is the guy who committed the action. All this blame game crap is nothing but political opportunism. Taking guns away from law abiding Americans does not stop criminals from ignoring the law. You know, killing people is illegal too. It didn't stop him from killing people.

Are liberals totally brain dead or what?

reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786


You know what they say. Opinions are like.. well you know the rest.

Banning weapons will not stop someone who is determined to do something like this.
They will find a way to buy a weapon.

Blaming everyone except for the shooter is the wrong way to do things.
The blame falls squarely with the person comitting the crime.

I don't think it's really your place to say who does/doesn't "need to own" "x" gun.

Nobody can do anything to stop shootings. If somebody wants to find an AR and commit such an act, they will. Regardless of weapon bans/restrictions.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
I find it very interesting that a muslim wants the people of the US disarmed. I wonder why that might be?

Strawman fallacy and Islamophobia to boot. Show me where I said I wanted the US disarmed. I'm a born and raised American citizen. I own guns. I never once said I didn't want people to own guns. I said there is no reason to own assault rifles.

Nice try. Actually it wasn't a nice try at all. It was really quite pathetic and sloppy.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786


Strawman fallacy and Islamophobia to boot. Show me where I said I wanted the US disarmed. I'm a born and raised American citizen. I own guns. I never once said I didn't want people to own guns. I said there is no reason to own assault rifles.
.

Islamophobia, lol..... Islam has quite a bit of phobias of it's own, wouldn't you agree? You seem to have a phobia of Americans who exercise their rights. Can you make up a phobia name for that, or do you see it as different?

Originally posted by PvtHudson
Taking guns away from law abiding Americans does not stop criminals from ignoring the law. You know, killing people is illegal too. It didn't stop him from killing people.

Are liberals totally brain dead or what?

edit on 23-7-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

No one's arguing taking all guns away from law-abiding Americans. That's another strawman that Conservatives love to rely on.

How could it stop him from killing people? That makes no sense. His guns were legally owned. Did you even read my commentary in the OP?

Are you totally brain dead or what?

Originally posted by PvtHudson


Islamophobia, lol..... Islam has quite a bit of phobias of it's own, wouldn't you agree? You seem to have a phobia of Americans who exercise their rights. Can you make up a phobia name for that, or do you see it as different?

Now you throw in some ad hominems and another strawman. I have no need to address your bigoted and invented trash anymore. I'll be ignoring you now and I'll be reporting any of your posts that violate T&C (which has been every single one so far)

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786

 

You know what they say. Opinions are like.. well you know the rest.

Banning weapons will not stop someone who is determined to do something like this.
They will find a way to buy a weapon.

Blaming everyone except for the shooter is the wrong way to do things.
The blame falls squarely with the person comitting the crime.

I agree, Grey, but as I said all of their weapons were legal. There is nothing that would suggest that they would seek out illegal weapons on the black market.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
I find it very interesting that a muslim wants the people of the US disarmed. I wonder why that might be?

Strawman fallacy and Islamophobia to boot. Show me where I said I wanted the US disarmed. I'm a born and raised American citizen. I own guns. I never once said I didn't want people to own guns. I said there is no reason to own assault rifles.

Nice try. Actually it wasn't a nice try at all. It was really quite pathetic and sloppy.

Then you fail to understand the historical reason behind the second amendment. Please study American history. The weapons are not for hunting, they are not for self defense; though they can also be used for either purpose. The second amendment exists so that the people of the United States may overthrow the US government should the need arise to do so.

Originally posted by jem504
I don't think it's really your place to say who does/doesn't "need to own" "x" gun.

Nobody can do anything to stop shootings. If somebody wants to find an AR and commit such an act, they will. Regardless of weapon bans/restrictions.

Well I'm entitled to my opinion so it IS my place. And as I said all of his weapons were legal. There's nothing to suggest that if an AR-15 were illegal he would have sought them out on the black market. He would have more than likely just made due with what he could obtain legally.

Argue it all you like but the gun was part of the problem.

reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786


Well than by your logic, we should. Ban water. As water has been used to kill peoplen oh and boats, and cars,and scissors,and knives,and gasoline, and on into infinity........

What do you mean by your ar15 comments? Once again, in the wrong hands almost anything can be a lethal weapon. Would you be sayhing the same if he ran a car full of fertilizer and diesel fuel into the theater resulting in the same deaths and injuries? Or is it just the fact a gun was used?

I can think of many reasons to have an AR 15. The first is that I can, the second is none of your business what I do with it. The third one is, the police have them why can't I? Do they have a better reason to need them than I do? It isn't like they are in the military, they need high powered armorpiercing rounds as much as I do. I was in the military, I have a very intimate relationship with that particular firearm. I know what I am doing with it, why shouldn't I be able to own one, never heard any complaints while I carried one for 6 years

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Then you fail to understand the historical reason behind the second amendment. Please study American history. The weapons are not for hunting, they are not for self defense; though they can also be used for either purpose. The second amendment exists so that the people of the United States may overthrow the US government should the need arise to do so.

What you said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

Overthrow the US government? Yeah you go ahead and try to do that. I'm sure a bunch of militias will really stand a chance against the American military.

I understand completely what you are saying and the right to defend one's self against an oppressive government. But that government will still have the military and all of its weaponry. There will be no overthrow of the US government, no matter how fascist it gets. There may be an uprising, but it will not be overthrown.

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
I can think of many reasons to have an AR 15. The first is that I can,

That's a circular reason. It's not a real reason at all. In fact it sounds like a 5 year old throwing a hissy fit.

the second is none of your business what I do with it.

That's not a reason either.

The third one is, the police have them why can't I?

Well, that's sort of close to a reason. It's still kind of immature sounding. "They have one. Why can't IIIIII have one? No fair!"

Much of this is a moot point. In the recent Heller decision by the United States Supreme Court, the 2nd Amendment was found to be an individual right after all. As if the majority of America didn't already understand this, they made it official and, as much as some may seriously dislike this outcome, the law of the land. There it is. Obama is cut off at the pass again.....by the Supreme Court. Oddly enough, in advance of events this time.

As I noted by stats from the American Firearms Institute, 40-50% of the American population own up to 280 Million firearms. Confiscation is hilarious. What army would be doing that? Even the entire military we have doesn't stand well against the estimated 100-120 million owners. The name Custer comes to mind...but it'll never come to that anyway.

The law says this is a moot point by rights granted us by our Creator. As hokey as it sounds, it says just that. Many take the meaning literal, too. Then, as I point out, Logistics make this whole thing a moot point.

Oh..and ban assault weapons? yeah.. That horse is gone from the barn and just...gone. The "Assault Weapons" have been selling faster than they can be produced, as much of the time as not since just prior to Obama taking office. Ban what? Everyone who ever wanted one has a few by now. Everyone I know who wanted one had it a few years ago.

When something like a shooting happens it's natural that people would want to find something to point the finger at right away. I think that's a very natural, instinctual and emotional human response to any shocking event.

In my opinion, the problem with your idea is, as others before me have so eloquently stated, so long as SOMEONE has guns we ALL need to have the right to have the same weapons. Thousands of years of history give us a solid indication of what happens to helpless populations. I know we'd like to think the world has turned, so to speak, and the past cannot repeat itself, but I assure you it can.

No matter your stance on guns you must agree that guns are not what CAUSE people to go on a rampage like this. Altering gun laws in anyway would be treating the symptom, and not the disease. If you want to change the world for the better, figure out what it is about American Society that makes people want to shoot up a movie theater. It happens every single day, maybe to a lesser extent but nonetheless..

Maybe we should ban Batman too.

The fact that you are Muslim means nothing to me, it's kind of pathetic that it was even mentioned. S&F for your opinion, even though I disagree.


Peace!

reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786


No, just on Obama's hands.

Colorado Shooter Active With Occupy Wall Street

Occupy Wall Street’s main website, OccupyWallStreet.org, has named Colorado Massacre Shooter James Holmes as an Occupy Black Bloc Member, which has been confirmed by Occupy Black Bloc researcher and expert private investigator Bill Warner

Source

For more reasons than one.
First he is the sitting President, happened on his watch so he will take the heat on how it is handled.
Second OWS is involved, the Liberals excuse to publicly defecate now got a lot more ugly and violent.

It will be hidden on the back pages at first by the MSM to protect their Messiah but the story is too big to whitewash over, as in bigger than OJ Simpson and Waco Tx combined kind of big.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

 

 

My guess would be he sees what has happened to all of the nations of brown people who the US has disarmed and apparently gun control does not work!
Look at just Iraq and Afghanistan, we implemented gun control there.
It seems they still get guns, or they just use bombs.
I'd prefer guns over bombs, less chance of children being hurt.
So, I could place blame on our politicians as this may have been a direct result of the feeling of the day but as for LaPierre, he is just keeping our rights for us, and making good cash at it too.
(Edit)
I do not understand how your post was deemed off topic nor out of bounds, mod too quick with the banfinger?

You want laws banning guns?


Please, tell me more about how criminals follow the laws.