↵Bee tree I can tell what you think by what you say, same way as you can tell what I think by what I say. Yes I am Libertarian. Can you point me to the part  of libertarian values of personal freedom and liberty with which  you do not agree? It would be very interesting to see what they are.
  Felloffher have stolen  my next point. I know a lot of LE officers and none of them same as non of people with critical thinking, think that background check will prevent many if any criminals from getting guns and none if they really want them .  Only a complete, naive, unintelligent, emotional,  Kool Aid drinking ignoramuses thinks that background checks will stop any criminal from getting gun or ammo.  They can steel it or buy it on black market. As they do now. Only if you drink Kool Aid you can believe that. 
Listen to this ; This is not about taking guns away from criminals. This is about taking guns from general population one step at a time in order to take away their constitutional rights as they are described in second amendment of US constitution. Same as it was done by Nazis, and Communists. According to statistics nowhere even complete elimination of private gun ownership diminished crime or even murder.  In Australia it went up 300% after such action.  ANd no I do not care what Obama says about this. I do not care because he lies. 
   

 

 
 

Most law enforcement officers agree: Gun control will hurt America

 

Here is what law enforcement thinks . Complete survey is here:
http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

Photo Credit: PoliceOne

Photo Credit: PoliceOne

Photo Credit: PoliceOne

Have a nice day.
Prager Hans

.Blitzen:​I woud love to hear what some of you would be saying if it were one of your kids who was killed in a mass murder spree. Easy to be cavalier when it doesn't effect one directly.
I would say same as what I am saying now:  "More back ground checks ??!!??!!. You must be kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!!They did no good so far. None of the mass killing which we had so far would be prevented by any crap which Obama is proposing now. 
Put in schools armed guards in form  of retired LE or off duty police officers."
That is what I would be saying and that is what the people in CT are saying and many are moving their children into such schools where there are armed guards. The rest is just a big Bull pucky !!!
THIS IS NOT ABOUT SAFETY OF  CHILDREN!!! Get it through your head. 
Prager Hans
 

Bee tree you said that you have watched Obama speak at the Uni of Hartford and that there was not a teleprompter?
Well look here. There are 2 of them. I guess you did not watch very well. I wonder how you were listening. :

Obama speaks on gun control at the University of Hartford on April 8, 2013.


Prager Hans

For immediate release.
April 10, 2013
From Alan Korwin

Full contact info at end



NOTE: Two senators announced today (April 10, 2013) they have reached a "compromise" on so-called "universal background checks." This is a code word for universal gun registration.

A press announcement and the wording of a long new gun law are not the same thing. DO NOT BELIEVE any news media that treat them as the same.

I will read the bill when it is released. It has NOT been released. NO ONE knows what it says. "News" reports are blowing smoke at you. They have no idea what's in the bill, drafted in secret.

When senator Schumer recently said his background bill "explicitly" states no registration he lied. It said no such thing. The Associated Press quoted him anyway. The "news" media in general has become a direct enemy of gun rights in this country. They violate every ethical principle there is when dealing with this subject.

I'm working on a report about the current background check system. It denies people the right to obtain firearms without a trial or due process. Despite more than one million supposedly legitimate denials, less than 150 were prosecuted in a two-year period according to the government's own numbers, with an unknown number of convictions. Who are these people? A bureaucracy set up to deny rights with little oversight and virtually no results is extremely suspect. More later.

For now, look what is happening in this legislation just enacted.

Consider the goal. Will this save children in kindergarten classes?
Or is something more sinister at work?


--


CONNECTICUT DRAFTS GUN LAW IN SECRET

Bans Firearms Public Already Owns

State retains power to own all especially deadly guns

Forces federal agents to either violate state law or deny civil rights

Effectively immediately

That's not the way networks covered it, is it, but it's the identical story


by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
GunLaws.com

--

Can you imagine what a tough uphill struggle the anti-gun-rights people would have if the "news" media wasn't falling all over itself to support the anti-rights side?

--

Connecticut just drafted 138 pages of gun law basically in secret, enacted it before it could be read and digested by those who signed it -- and certainly not by the public it pretends to legitimately control -- and in doing so ended up requiring federally licensed agents in the state to violate federal law, or flatly deny citizens their rights. Just on practical grounds this is a disaster. But that's as if nothing, according to leading experts.

Legislators who draft laws in secret are behaving like the king's men who ignited the American Revolution. They can expect no less if they continue down such a dark road, many experts say.

What did the officials choose to draft law against by this nefarious method? Only the very palladium of liberty, the very thing the Revolution warned us to guard against, a bill to reduce and actually eliminate a right for keeping and bearing arms the public already legally keeps.

Along with a list of many of the most popular makes and models in use today, the bill includes broad descriptions of arms to cover an untold number of other modern and older firearms. Are they out of their minds?

Is it an excuse that they didn't know what they were doing? Of course not. That is an aggravating factor.

These officials operate by consent of the governed, with rights of minorities protected. Laws are to be drafted in public, with input from experts and the public. They deliberately and with malice aforethought chose not to.

Infringement is banned by the Bill of Rights. This is not some debating point. Violation of the Bill of Rights is an offense against We the People, and throughout our history has earned punishment. Not just at the ballot box, but real punishment. Else, what value the Bill of Rights?

Requiring agents of the federal government, in this case, licensed federal firearms dealers (FFLs), to conduct paperwork and electronic examinations of private citizens which the agents are banned by law from doing, is a clever way to stop citizens from getting firearms. It is also malfeasance of the worst kind, and deserves punishment of the highest order. This isn't just use-the-other-lunch-counter bigotry, this is the no-lunch-counter-for-you brand.

(Connecticut is requiring FFLs to conduct background checks on private firearm transfers, and offers to pay them. It is a federal offense for FFLs to use the NICS background check system for anything other than their own authorized business sales.)

But the worst offense remains drafting and proposing such treasonous poison in secret. Merely voting for it is no less serious an act. Legislators who participated in this infringement of the fundamental civil and human rights of the citizens of Connecticut act as enemies of American freedom whether they recognize it or not. This is not how Americans behave.

Using the acts of a madman to justify the acts of these madmen is reprehensible, immoral and corrupt. Worse, their failure to act in a way that might actually identify and curb future deranged monsters is a failure to accomplish their most rudimentary role. It is abrogation of their responsibility as elected officials. This is grounds for removal from office.

How should the public react when their officials depart from the rule of law, act without concern for established procedure, quorum in secret, enact laws without public knowledge, defy existing law and issue proclamations that cannot legally be met? Cheering them on, as the mainstream media has been encouraging, is irrational. Irrational acts in this arena bring up the specter of hoplophobia, the morbid fear of weapons. Is this supposed political problem in actuality an undiagnosed medical one?

When the king chooses to post laws too high on the wall to be read, issues edicts that cannot be tolerated, takes actions without the consent of the governed, allows representatives but does not allow them to represent their constituents, and attempts to strip from the public the main tools they possess to guarantee their safety and independence in deference to his own, what course can the public be expected to steer?

Perhaps the most curious element of the Connecticut approach to gun law, and the most dangerous facet of this entire adventure, is that government officials have exempted themselves from this whole proclamation.

They remain free to own, possess and use every bit of this lethal arsenal they forbid to the public. If these implements are so dastardly, so deadly, so powerful, so dangerous they must be banned from We the People, how on Earth can We the People possibly entrust them to the hands of, well, who exactly?

Under what rationale can all the "designated" people in this secretly operating government be allowed to possess such awesome firepower? Such high capacity? Such dark guns with so many features? Do Blacks in America trust the man quite that much? Do you? Just who do they think they need it for? Do they face murderers the public does not? Just who do murderers murder?

Isn't it the government that is the corrupt, immoral, capable of every imaginable act of deceit, deception, official malfeasance, coverup, fraud, theft and mayhem we see in the nightly "news"? Do criminals seek out police to assault, or do they seek out us innocently in theaters, schools, shops and our homes? If the police keep saying they're outgunned, hey, they're the second responders, anyone can see that on the "news." If anyone needs arms capable of repelling boarders, it's the public -- the people crime is perpetrated upon.

If the government needs all this sophisticated weaponry, feels it must exempt itself from the laws it proposes to control us, how does that square with the fact that it is government that is the greatest murderer of people, and has been throughout all of recorded history?

If the anti-rights Americans on the left have their way, led now by Connecticutters, we would be relegated to little guns that don't work well, with only a few small bullets, that fire the small bullets slowly and then we would be out. This is not the balance of power the Founders sought. Small guns with a few bullets are not safe. Limited power does not keep your own government in check. Government arguing to limit your power in deference to its own is government not to be trusted.

When we the people have pop guns, and the government by law grants unto itself the power to own and use all the serious guns on the list it forbids to us, the free country we all want is over, and that cannot be allowed to pass.

That is the way of a tyrannical government that does not trust its people. The excuse that this is for our own safety is abject nonsense. "Disarming you for your own safety" has been the rubric of every tyrant of the last century. Sorry, Connecticut, even if you mean well, history has got you there. And if you do mean well, perhaps worse, it makes you classic useful idiots.

--

But cling to hope, you in Connecticut. You can yet act for your own safety. Trash this nasty unconstitutional feckless illegal infringement approach.

Start dealing immediately with mental misfits who create the atrocities you seek to cure. Face up to Big Pharma, and the psychotropic drugs they blitz advertise that have been found in the majority of the mass killers. Yes, that's true. Make that grotesque empirical anomaly the issue it is, not the guns the innocent public owns, which you assault at great peril to yourselves.

Start dealing immediately with the problem of state-run health departments and the AMA and HIPPA's constant failure and adamantine resistance to disclosing mental health records of the truly sick. Fix the prohibited possessor list, where the problem really exists and stop flying the false flag of gun registration disguised as background checks. Writing down the names of the innocent in a big FBI book has no crime-fighting component.

Immediately acknowledge that lunatic control is severely lacking, and your 138 pages of mainstream-lauded Connecticut law keeps this record perfectly intact. By strengthening government arsenals with the deadliest weapons, denying decent firearms to the public, operating in secret and banning the right to keep and bear arms through legal trickery, you demonstrate your own need for treatment, and lack of ability to legislate in a meaningful way on a critically important issue. You can stop patting yourselves on the back now.

And know well that your use of tragedy to advance the infringements of freedom-hating bigots around you will only make matters worse, as we have seen throughout history. You are ignoring forces moving America to an awful place it finds itself in today: rabid incessant encouragement of insane blood-letting violence coming out of TV, Hollywood, video games, comic books, the web, social media, and non-stop "news" media glorification of these horrific perps, planning the next big thing right now. They laugh at your silly new law while you cry oh what a good boy am I.

Is it any wonder the public is outraged by your actions, media propagandists' adulations notwithstanding. The media's complicity in all this only cements the enlightened public's understanding of "news" media's role as one of the greatest enemies American freedom currently faces.

Our goal now must be the addition of millions of new enlightened gun owners. There are one hundred million of us safely armed in more than half of all homes. Can you imagine what an impossible uphill struggle you anti-gun-rights people would have if the "news" media wasn't falling all over itself to support your side? Gun save lives. Guns stop crime. Guns protect you. Guns keep you safe. Guns are good. Guns are why America is still free. You don't hear much of that side, do you. The rest of us understand it as the rock solid core of what makes America America.

////////


"Don't be a spectator in the struggle to preserve freedom."


"No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing
because he could do only a little."
--Edmund Burke

Public sentiment is everything.
With public sentiment, nothing can fail.
Without it, nothing can succeed. 
--Abraham Lincoln

Source:
http://www.gunlaws.com/updates.htm

============

 

Prager. I said,  ".... even if he used a teleprompter, it wouldn't matter to me", because I was focused on the content. I saw an impassioned Michele Obama respond with tears, too, do we say it is because of a teleprompter? Who cares about a teleprompter, if the tears are real? We all hate the fakers and agree on that? I don't think the Obama's are faking. Either one.  The fact we waste words on a teleprompter and not the issue is bizarre.

Felloffer is far from a respected source, as far as I am concerned. It seems you and others would like to think anyone who has depths of emotions are incapable of rational thought, as well. That is another absurdity.

Yes, law enforcement use these registries as tools to find criminals and suspect criminals. It is what CT Law Enforcers explained. I was listening to a discussion on the radio actually, so I can't give you a link. You could just call me crazy, stupid or liar, like everyone else who wants to shut me up, I suppose. 

***I haven't caught up on the massive info dumping that went on overnight, (for me) and have a rather busy day, today, personally. So, if I do not expound more to any other questions, I am not avoiding any of you, just really, I do have a life.  I read Prager's first few lines is about all, as I'm still drinking my first cup . ****

 

Liberals are like children who believe in the fairy dust of increased laws and taxes to make this world a fairer and safer place, and Obama is their Peter Pan.  Our economy is being devastated by debt, wars are looming, millions are unemployed, borders need to be secured, schools and infrastructure need to be rebuilt, oil resources are being wasted and on and on.  These are issues which affect billions.  Yet Obama is crusading (his greatest skill) for laws which, at most, will inconvenience a few thousand law abiding gun owners (those who don't already live in states with laws  worse than what he is wasting his time on) and defy the constitutional rights he swore to uphold,  And which will likely endanger us more than protect us.  This convinces me that he has no leadership skills whatsoever, no sense of responsibility or integrity, and he just does not want to do any real work.  And then I remember what he did to our national health care and I think, thank God, hopefully he will be distracted by these issues where he can play the "hero" for the next 3 years and cost his party  every shred of credibility as they deserve.. And maybe at least things won't get too much worse.

Micaho, that was one of your more amusing posts. Thanks for the chuckle. Still haven't finished that first cup, but I had to just say this! Because there was an Ed Op  piece I read "somewhere" that proceeded to explain how compared to the rest of the country, a CT Republican really is a Liberal.

You gotta love how hard people try to fit those square pegs into round holes! 

 

Excellent posts by Prager.

I love to see people defending Liberty and the US Constitution.  It's so refreshing. 

Yes, Bee, Obama is a joke, but I'm not laughing.  Just holding my breath.