Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

All time single day record set last Friday for firearms sales in the US, surpassing Dec 21, 2012 when Obama signed numerous executive orders and created a gun control task force led by Biden.

http://fortune.com/2015/12/01/gun-sales-black-friday/

But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

dbackjon wrote:But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

93henfan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

LOL - sad but true

dbackjon wrote:But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

it is not as though he hasn't tried.

And he is trying again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/us/sa ... .html?_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"President Obama once again called for better background checks and new restrictions on access to guns for people who might pose a danger.

“We should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal,” he said in a previously scheduled interview with CBS News. He added, “The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there’s some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don’t happen as frequently.”'


Funny thing...Obama has sent, and is sending, massive amounts of arms to dangerous clowns the Middle East and all over the world in order to kill people while destabilizing their governments. The results has been the deaths of 10s of thousands of people, many innocent women and children. Obama has authorized the bombing and killing of many more people than have been killed in American mass murder attacks, and he is responsible for providing huge numbers of heavy arms into the hands of mentally unstable people...and he has the nerve to say he wants more gun control because mass shootings in America have no parallel anywhere else in the world.

You really can't make this stuff up.

dbackjon wrote:But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

He's on a roll at this point

its like he's addicted to failure

CID1990 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:But Obama is gonna take your weapons away. for the last 7 years

He's on a roll at this point

its like he's addicted to failure

Just a Donk being a Donk.

Cluck U wrote:And he is trying again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/us/sa ... .html?_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"President Obama once again called for better background checks and new restrictions on access to guns for people who might pose a danger.

“We should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal,” he said in a previously scheduled interview with CBS News. He added, “The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there’s some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don’t happen as frequently.”'


Funny thing...Obama has sent, and is sending, massive amounts of arms to dangerous clowns the Middle East and all over the world in order to kill people while destabilizing their governments. The results has been the deaths of 10s of thousands of people, many innocent women and children. Obama has authorized the bombing and killing of many more people than have been killed in American mass murder attacks, and he is responsible for providing huge numbers of heavy arms into the hands of mentally unstable people...and he has the nerve to say he wants more gun control because mass shootings in America have no parallel anywhere else in the world.

You really can't make this stuff up.

His leadership on this issue, and the ideas he is proposing, are just weak and ineffectual. I know he said in one of the interviews that obviously we won't stop every one of these incidents with the remedies he's proposing, but I'm wondering if we would stop any of them. What good does an extra day waiting period and "better" background checks do when these people have no prior history and maybe even no medical history pointing to a concern? While we are certainly right to stand up there and deplore the violence and the extent and frequency of it, but then we never seem to propose anything that would actually stem it. Stop being feckless, have some courage and take a stand, even if you don't win the legislation in the end. I'd rather somebody in politics start taking some stands and try to improve things rather than just going for the soundbites as we seem to be doing here.

A more effective approach would be to ban muslims..

GannonFan wrote:

Cluck U wrote:And he is trying again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/us/sa ... .html?_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"President Obama once again called for better background checks and new restrictions on access to guns for people who might pose a danger.

“We should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal,” he said in a previously scheduled interview with CBS News. He added, “The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there’s some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don’t happen as frequently.”'


Funny thing...Obama has sent, and is sending, massive amounts of arms to dangerous clowns the Middle East and all over the world in order to kill people while destabilizing their governments. The results has been the deaths of 10s of thousands of people, many innocent women and children. Obama has authorized the bombing and killing of many more people than have been killed in American mass murder attacks, and he is responsible for providing huge numbers of heavy arms into the hands of mentally unstable people...and he has the nerve to say he wants more gun control because mass shootings in America have no parallel anywhere else in the world.

You really can't make this stuff up.

His leadership on this issue, and the ideas he is proposing, are just weak and ineffectual. I know he said in one of the interviews that obviously we won't stop every one of these incidents with the remedies he's proposing, but I'm wondering if we would stop any of them. What good does an extra day waiting period and "better" background checks do when these people have no prior history and maybe even no medical history pointing to a concern? While we are certainly right to stand up there and deplore the violence and the extent and frequency of it, but then we never seem to propose anything that would actually stem it. Stop being feckless, have some courage and take a stand, even if you don't win the legislation in the end. I'd rather somebody in politics start taking some stands and try to improve things rather than just going for the soundbites as we seem to be doing here.

Oh you'll get your wish. The cunt gets started on Jan 20, 2017.

If you think guns sold well after Sandy Hook, wait until after election night 2016.

How many people here own guns, and if so, what do you own?

93henfan wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
His leadership on this issue, and the ideas he is proposing, are just weak and ineffectual. I know he said in one of the interviews that obviously we won't stop every one of these incidents with the remedies he's proposing, but I'm wondering if we would stop any of them. What good does an extra day waiting period and "better" background checks do when these people have no prior history and maybe even no medical history pointing to a concern? While we are certainly right to stand up there and deplore the violence and the extent and frequency of it, but then we never seem to propose anything that would actually stem it. Stop being feckless, have some courage and take a stand, even if you don't win the legislation in the end. I'd rather somebody in politics start taking some stands and try to improve things rather than just going for the soundbites as we seem to be doing here.

Oh you'll get your wish. The cunt gets started on Jan 20, 2017.

If you think guns sold well after Sandy Hook, wait until after election night 2016.

Nah, she'll be no better once in office. If we really think this is a problem in America (and I think we can all agree that it is) then we need real solutions to it. If we think getting all the guns, handguns included since most of these events are committed with pretty simple handguns that would never be included in assault weapon bans, is the answer, then let's hear ideas on how to go about doing that. If it's really that important, let's start taking some positions that would actually have a chance of reducing these events. I doubt we'll hear that from Hillary, she's going to take the same stance that Obama has taken - bemoan the state of America, say that we are culturally deficient in some way, and then point to the other political party and say they are the reason we can't even propose real solutions. Politics trumps all, forget getting actual results.

GannonFan wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Oh you'll get your wish. The cunt gets started on Jan 20, 2017.

If you think guns sold well after Sandy Hook, wait until after election night 2016.

Nah, she'll be no better once in office. If we really think this is a problem in America (and I think we can all agree that it is) then we need real solutions to it. If we think getting all the guns, handguns included since most of these events are committed with pretty simple handguns that would never be included in assault weapon bans, is the answer, then let's hear ideas on how to go about doing that. If it's really that important, let's start taking some positions that would actually have a chance of reducing these events. I doubt we'll hear that from Hillary, she's going to take the same stance that Obama has taken - bemoan the state of America, say that we are culturally deficient in some way, and then point to the other political party and say they are the reason we can't even propose real solutions. Politics trumps all, forget getting actual results.

Standing up to the NRA would be a good start.

Peems wrote:How many people here own guns, and if so, what do you own?

I own a Red Ryder and paintball gun. That's it.

Everything else was lost in the bay when my sea kayak capsized.

Peems wrote:How many people here own guns, and if so, what do you own?

I got one in strawberry, grape, and blueberry.

Peems wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Nah, she'll be no better once in office. If we really think this is a problem in America (and I think we can all agree that it is) then we need real solutions to it. If we think getting all the guns, handguns included since most of these events are committed with pretty simple handguns that would never be included in assault weapon bans, is the answer, then let's hear ideas on how to go about doing that. If it's really that important, let's start taking some positions that would actually have a chance of reducing these events. I doubt we'll hear that from Hillary, she's going to take the same stance that Obama has taken - bemoan the state of America, say that we are culturally deficient in some way, and then point to the other political party and say they are the reason we can't even propose real solutions. Politics trumps all, forget getting actual results.

Standing up to the NRA would be a good start.

Have a position, have a principle, and make a stand on it. It's sad when people talk about how awful it is that these things happen, and then talk generally (not propose or initiate, that would be too much work) about things we could do that ultimately wouldn't do anything to stop what we're seeing. It's disingenuous.

BDKJMU wrote:A more effective approach would be to ban muslims..

Go on....

Ban the Second Amendment?



Ban guns?



I guarantee you there will be violent push back. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more violent push back than we've ever seen. People want to protect themselves from the nut jobs, so why take away guns from 99.999% of the reasonable people when the .001% (plus whatever % of Muslins there are in this country) are still going to get guns to threaten everyone else.

Cat is out of the bag...genie out of the bottle. You aren't going to solve the supposed gun problem by banning guns. If you ban guns, you'll be in for a fight...even from some of the more reasonable people.

Reasonable people don't want their guns taken away...and it would be unreasonable to try to take them away.

I will say this...IEDs will become used more often here in America. That is inevitable. If you want them to become even more popular even faster, try to take people's guns.

GannonFan wrote:

Peems wrote:
Standing up to the NRA would be a good start.

Have a position, have a principle, and make a stand on it. It's sad when people talk about how awful it is that these things happen, and then talk generally (not propose or initiate, that would be too much work) about things we could do that ultimately wouldn't do anything to stop what we're seeing. It's disingenuous.

I believe this would be a good start http://www.propublica.org/article/repub ... e-research" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The NRA has vehemently fought to keep gun violence research from happening, and as this article states, owning guns, and gun violence research are not mutually exclusive.

quick ninja edit: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/cdc-ban-gu ... d=18909347" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
this abc article goes a little in to detail about how the cuts made back in 96' already have made a lasting impact.

BDKJMU wrote:A more effective approach would be to ban muslims..

Or require firearm education and proof before purchase. Sorry, but obviously people can't be trusted with weapons. Let's at least attempt to educate people.

If the government wants a full scale revolution on their hands, then take peoples guns.

Ban guns? Yeah. It'll be as successful as Prohibition.

Ibanez wrote:If the government wants a full scale revolution on their hands, then take peoples guns.

Ban guns? Yeah. It'll be as successful as Prohibition.

I bet the Government would win.

Peems wrote:How many people here own guns, and if so, what do you own?

Hear that? It's the sound of popping conk boners in anticipation of responding to your question.

Ibanez wrote:If the government wants a full scale revolution on their hands, then take peoples guns.

Ban guns? Yeah. It'll be as successful as Prohibition.

Who is advocating banning all guns?