Fallout of The Aurora Shooting. “Liberals, Are You Listening?”

Bill of Rights and Guns

From this I’d say that the liberals don’t understand the very ones they declare that they represent. It seems as if the people believe in just the opposite that the liberal ideology preaches. Self interest takes priority over the interests of others every time and this is not what liberalism is all about.

Gun sales in Colorado have soared:
Despite new condemnation of America’s lax gun laws, which allowed the shooter to amass a veritable arsenal of weapons and ammunition, gun sales shot up in Colorado in the days after the massacre, with background checks up 41 percent. “Firearms instructors say they’re also seeing increased interest in the training required for a concealed-carry permit,” says Sarah Burnett at The Denver Post. “A lot of it is people saying, ‘I didn’t think I needed a gun, but now I do,” Jake Meyers, a gun store employee, tells Burnett. “When it happens in your backyard, people start reassessing… ‘Hey, I go to the movies.'”

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , | 17 Comments

Post navigation

17 thoughts on “Fallout of The Aurora Shooting. “Liberals, Are You Listening?”

  1. BB-Idaho

    True; I was in the ammo mfg. business and it always increased when there was a massacre (or a democrat running). I quit counting where my stuff ended up after our stuff was used in
    the Reagan assassination attempt, but undoubtably most of it
    was legit, deer hunting, target shooting, law enforcement, military.
    So, if I were to take responsibilty for a few hundred Iraqi tanks,
    bin Laden and thousands of game animals…I’d be stuck with the
    responsibility for innocent dead kids too. BTW our local theatre
    has banned cc from attendance which is sure to fire up the
    gun guys even more. Up go sales!

  2. The Griper

    you were only in the business but you did not decide how it was going to be used. that decision is strictly dependent upon the buyer of it.
    that is the whole essense of the meaning of responsibility, isn’t it?

  3. Hi Griper. Since you’re kind enough to comment on my blog, I thought I’d chime in here. I am a liberal, but I also own guns. Heck, I live in South Florida. However, I do think the sale and ownership of them should be regulated, say, at least as much as Sudafed. When I heard about the shooting, my first reaction, other than shock and horror, was that it was Colorado, so half the audience was probably armed. Yet nobody seems to have stopped this by shooting the SOB. I think most people don’t react that quickly in this type of situation. More often, their guns are taken away and used against them.

  4. The Griper

    welcome, Donna. it is good to see you. I guessed that you were a liberal by how you word your posts but that is fine with me just as you probably guessed where i stood by my comments.
    hope you enjoy my blog enough to become a regular.
    the problem with regulation is in one question:
    at what point does it become overregulation?
    i have never been given a good specific answer to that question.
    the same question can be asked in terms of business also or the regulation of an individual’s life.

  5. BB-Idaho

    It is pessimistic, but no matter how much regulation, education
    or intervention, some of these things remain inevitable…. you can
    only blame societies dark fringe…and carry on.

  6. The Griper

    isn’t that what the Right have been telling those on the left all of these years, BB, but the left has ignored it and yelled for more regulations each and every time?

    • BB-Idaho

      Well, I was speaking independent of politics. But, yes we
      find that 41% of Republicans are gun owners, while only
      23% of Democrats are. As far as regulation, though, it depends
      (as ever) on whose horse is getting gored: 80% of Republicans favor the intrusive Patriot Act, while only 43% of Democrats
      like it. ..and yes, libertarians tend to decide with the Dems
      on that one. I guess the irony is that we will spend billions
      defending against foreign terrorists and ignore the more common
      homegrown nut cases….

  7. The Griper

    and how are we ignoring the home grown ones, BB? aren’t they both dealt with only after they reveal themselves as such? and do you really want a government that tries to anticipate a person’s actions? i surely don’t. psychology thinks it can but remember what they predict is only a probability not an absolute. and our justice system is one where probability is not enough.

    as for your example of the patriot act, i don’t think very many on the right who understand it favor that in total either other than politicians.

  8. BB-Idaho

    In response to “patriot act, i don’t think very many on the right who understand it favor that in total either other than politicians.” 80% on the right. I’m not sure what percent understand it. As for the homegrown ones, the FBI monitors conspiracy groups, conducts stings and the like. I agree, a single person is impossible to interdict, a frustration admitted by law enforcement. That is why
    I mentioned society’s dark fringe. What do you think of investigating a person wanting to buy 4-500 lbs of C-4, or a stinger missile…or
    even 6,000 rounds of assault ammo? The banking industry surely
    does more background checking on our credit!

  9. The Griper

    i don’t think a person would go into a legitimate gun shop and order those things other than the ammo. that would, more than likely be bought on the black market in expectation of it being a secret sale. as for the ammo, that can be bought in small quantities over a period of time to avoid suspicion.

    and yes, the banking industry probably does more background checking on credit but credit is not psychology. credit has a definite history. the psychology of a person which is what we must understand in regards to this issue, usually has none that can be called a definitive history.

    would Holmes be considered as a nut case prior to the incident in Aurora? probably not. if they have no history of treatment what valid basis is there to deny any individual the ability to own a weapon? we surely do not want government officials diagnosing the psychological well being of individuals, do we?

    what value do individual rights have if the government denies even one person of his right to own a gun without justification? for then, that same excuse can be used to deny everyone.

    individual rights is a funny concept. it is one of those concepts that applies to everyone or it applies to no one. there is no inbetween or compromise. once compromise is sought the whole concept of equal treatment by the government goes out the window.

    • BB-Idaho

      Let’s turn “what value do individual rights have if the government denies even one person of his right to own a gun without justification? for then, that same excuse can be used to deny everyone.” on its head for a moment. Recently two states
      have offered bills requiring mandatory gun ownership by all citizens and at least two communities in the US require it. I suspect our libertarian instincts would find this just as repulsive?
      As for the 2nd Amendment, what type of loose constructionism
      would equate a muzzle loader by the fireplace for a militiaman
      with an AR-15, shotgun and a couple of 40mm Glocks for some
      young kid with no military interest or experience? I would submit that the strict constructionist would find such enigmatic at best.
      (just opining here, I’ve already agreed that we have little control
      over the ‘dark fringes’)

  10. The Griper

    what type of constructionism would allow it? the same that would allow it in a militia. by your question only muzzle loaders could be used by a member of a militia. and remember what defines a militia.

    if you agree that we cannot control over the individuals that make up the dark fringes then of what value are gun control laws? they would only effect those who are not one of the dark fringes.

  11. BB-Idaho

    “what value are gun control laws?”
    They bring a modicum of common sense. For example, you cannot
    mount a recoilless rifle on your Chevy and blast toll booths (as much as that would be gratifying). You cannot use your military
    rifle when equipped with spin-stabilized squashead grenades.
    You cannot possess that useful smallarms weapon, the GAU-8
    that fires 600 rounds a minute.
    “what defines a militia.?” lots of definitions..the Swiss, who possessing a military weapon, must train regularly and be prepared to be called up for service, the US National Guard, groups which
    claim to be a militia, of which there are many and of varied motivation. My cousin who hunts deer is not a militia..the neighbor with his concealed carry permit is not a milita, etc. and most oddly,
    me who has no gun WAS militia, with orders to report to the pentagon in uniform in the event of mobilization back in the joys of youth. So, IMO the value of gun laws is to set some sort of limit
    on what could be OK Corral anarchy.
    Common sense: two 2yr old kids were killed in a neighboring state
    this Spring..not dark fringe stuff, just stupid carelessness..their
    fathers left them in the car with a loaded weapon in the glove compartment…little kids love guns as much as grownups…you
    don’t see much common sense anymore, Griper.

  12. The Griper

    ok, this where we separate the chaff from the wheat. we need to separate the term gun control in terms of ownership from the term gun control in terms of usage.
    when most on the right refer to gun control i think most would say that the term relates to ownership not usage. and our earlier comments were about ownership not usage. at least that is what i thought and the mindset i was in at the time.

    your last comment was about usage and i don’t believe you will find many on the right in disagreement with you that the two examples you gave should not be illegal. you might find a few but they would only be a fringe group also. there have always been laws in terms of their usage.

    and i agree with your judgment of carelessness in regards to the two kids. but unfortunately laws cannot prevent carelessness either. and imho, the carelessness was not in having the gun in the glove box but in leaving kids that age in the car by themselves. there is too much that could happen to kids when left alone in a car, even one without a gun in the box.

    • BB-Idaho

      Well Griper, hope will will understand..I need concentrate a bit
      on a personal problem: puddle under the left rear wheel of my
      Ram 4wd pickup. I suspect brake fluid, have an appointment tomorrow and the garage is WAY downhill. Am concerned of
      zooming by the garage at 75mph if I miss the traffic and pedestrians. It is a 5 speed and I intend to go slow enough to
      downshift…but I don’t want to end up in the newspaper with
      ‘collateral damage’. any advice?

  13. The Griper

    yup understand very well. drive in low gear and make use of the hand brake or emergency brake

    • BB-Idaho

      Thanks Griper…I totally forgot about the emergency brake!
      ..as they say, ‘old chemists never die..only their entropy

Be respecful or your comment will be deleted. Also know that Alinsky tactics do not phase me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: