Gun Control: Dem Bill Would Outlaw Firearm Brands On Kid’s Clothing And Colorful Guns

[jc000]

Get 'em while they're young! (http://www.inquisitr.com/1357391/gun-control-dem-bill-would-outlaw-firearm-brands-on-kids-clothing-and-colorful-guns/)

Hoping this bill doesn't have a chance, but you never know...

[av8usn]

More worthless drivel from the "ship of fools." Never mind such unimportant issues as illegal immigration, gestapo tactics employed by the I.R.S., unemployment, runaway deficit spending and national debt, failed foreign policies...ah, but I digress!

[SailDesign]

Get 'em while they're young! (http://www.inquisitr.com/1357391/gun-control-dem-bill-would-outlaw-firearm-brands-on-kids-clothing-and-colorful-guns/)

Hoping this bill doesn't have a chance, but you never know...

If that first kid is shooting a 357Mag as they say, then I'll eat my hat. 22Mag at best.... Otherwise - good stuff. :)

[GardoneVT]

Smart thinking for the opposition. If guns can't be marketed or pitched to kids by law, the only thing they'll hear is the viewpoint of the anti's, as delivered by your taxpayer funded public school. By the time they get old enough to be legally able to shoot a gun, they'll be indoctrinated enough to not want to.

[orionz06]

If this gets any traction I foresee adult sizes shifting suddenly.

[BaiHu]

Smart thinking for the opposition. If guns can't be marketed or pitched to kids by law, the only thing they'll hear is the viewpoint of the anti's, as delivered by your taxpayer funded public school. By the time they get old enough to be legally able to shoot a gun, they'll be indoctrinated enough to not want to.
Because it worked with cigarettes? I'm not saying we don't have less smoking in movies, etc, but I don't think any kid is really going to NOT enjoy gun culture because you can't have gun t-shirts. Plus, a smart kid will design gun shirts using fingers, peace signs, fruit and vegetables and then what will they do?

If this gets any traction I foresee adult sizes shifting suddenly.
Agreed.

[Jeep]

Smart thinking for the opposition. If guns can't be marketed or pitched to kids by law, the only thing they'll hear is the viewpoint of the anti's, as delivered by your taxpayer funded public school. By the time they get old enough to be legally able to shoot a gun, they'll be indoctrinated enough to not want to.

Gardone: It's only smart thinking if they are quasi-totalitarians who believe neither in the freedom of speech, or the freedom of thought. Of course, there is a lot of evidence suggesting that many anti-gun types are quasi-totalitarians, which is yet another reason to oppose them.

In the end, I think all our other freedoms depend on the right to keep and bear arms.

[joshs]

Get 'em while they're young! (http://www.inquisitr.com/1357391/gun-control-dem-bill-would-outlaw-firearm-brands-on-kids-clothing-and-colorful-guns/)

Hoping this bill doesn't have a chance, but you never know...

Because introducing bills that infringe on just one constitutional right at a time is too time consuming . . .

[orionz06]

This is something I could see non-gun organizations fighting even.

[GardoneVT]

Because it worked with cigarettes? I'm not saying we don't have less smoking in movies, etc, but I don't think any kid is really going to NOT enjoy gun culture because you can't have gun t-shirts. Plus, a smart kid will design gun shirts using fingers, peace signs, fruit and vegetables and then what will they do?

Agreed.

It's a cultural thing. When I grew up in Chicago I was never exposed to firearms in person .Or in media, or even from my family. That's the point : people are not going to defend a right they don't know they have.

Someone who's already taught the Way of The Gun won't care, but it matters in places where the prevailing culture is anti.

[BaiHu]

It's a cultural thing. When I grew up in Chicago I was never exposed to firearms in person .Or in media, or even from my family. That's the point : people are not going to defend a right they don't know they have.

Someone who's already taught the Way of The Gun won't care, but it matters in places where the prevailing culture is anti.
Serious semi-rhetorical question (yup, I just wrote that-lol): Despite what you saw in Chicago, was there never gun crime? Were there never good people there with guns to protect themselves and their families? Was all gun talk bad? All about the evil gun companies, the evil 2nd ammendment and the evil NRA?

[GardoneVT]

Serious semi-rhetorical question (yup, I just wrote that-lol): Despite what you saw in Chicago, was there never gun crime? Were there never good people there with guns to protect themselves and their families? Was all gun talk bad? All about the evil gun companies, the evil 2nd ammendment and the evil NRA?

Hoplophobia is a movement which requires ignorance to thrive. When you don't know about guns, everything the teevee and the suits say makes sense, because you don't know any better and the voice of the opposition is discredited. We laugh at the idea of magazine bans and gun laws, because we know they don't work. The average Chicagoan doesn't have that knowledge base.

[BaiHu]

I hear you, but as someone's tag line here is: you can't wake someone who pretends to be asleep. I see these problems as media driven and not really fact driven. If someone wants to believe whatever the TV tells them, then no message we throw at them will wake them, no?

[Stephen]

Seems like a stupid bill, even from their perspective. It has zero chance of passing, and I think it only serves to motivate our side going into an election and give us another talking point about what nutters they are. Although its worth noting that the representative who proposed this bill received millions from Bloomberg in her campaign to replace Jesse Jackson Jr. after the latter went to jail. I assume she's just giving a nod to her benefactor here.


Hoplophobia is a movement which requires ignorance to thrive. When you don't know about guns, everything the teevee and the suits say makes sense, because you don't know any better and the voice of the opposition is discredited. We laugh at the idea of magazine bans and gun laws, because we know they don't work. The average Chicagoan doesn't have that knowledge base.

All big cities tend to be anti-gun, but Chicago seems to take it to another level. To this outsider at least.

[GardoneVT]

I hear you, but as someone's tag line here is: you can't wake someone who pretends to be asleep. I see these problems as media driven and not really fact driven. If someone wants to believe whatever the TV tells them, then no message we throw at them will wake them, no?

No doubt there's people like that, but I'd chalk a great deal of the problem up to people just not knowing what they don't know. Before I went to Air Force Basic training I thought ARs were some kind of death ray, until I fired my first shot through the .mil M16A2.

After that moment I realized everything I ever knew about guns came from someone else. If everyone around you says the color green is called blue you won't know the truth unless someone takes the time to tell you, and that's tough when outreach is illegal. In Chicago, until very recently it was illegal to bring an unregistered handgun into city limits. So that makes show and tell tough.

[BaiHu]

Can't disagree with your point.

[NETim]

Inside every Liberal is a tyrant screaming to get out.

[David S.]

As far as I can tell, there are a lot of people that believe the 2nd amendment is about as relevant to today as the 3rd. Nobody in America is concerned that a Seal team is going to demand to crash on their couch tonight. The Revolutionary War has been fought and won. It has been for a while now. We've moved past the challenges that 19th century colonists faced, making both amendment functionally irrelevant to today's problems.

[David S.]

Inside every Liberal is a tyrant screaming to get out.

Ya know they say the same thing about Conservatives, right?

[NETim]

As far as I can tell, there are a lot of people that believe the 2nd amendment is about as relevant to today as the 3rd. Nobody in America is concerned that a Seal team is going to demand to crash on their couch tonight. The Revolutionary War has been fought and won. It has been for a while now. We've moved past the challenges that 19th century colonists faced, making both amendment functionally irrelevant to today's problems.

And there are still people who believe Mr. Obama is a competent leader.

[NETim]

Ya know they say the same thing about Conservatives, right?


Yep. They say all kinds of things about Conservatives. In this case though I don't believe it's the Right pushing this agenda.

[GardoneVT]

As far as I can tell, there are a lot of people that believe the 2nd amendment is about as relevant to today as the 3rd. Nobody in America is concerned that a Seal team is going to demand to crash on their couch tonight. The Revolutionary War has been fought and won. It has been for a while now. We've moved past the challenges that 19th century colonists faced, making both amendment functionally irrelevant to today's problems.

Bull.

If someone is not exposed to the benefits of a civil right, they will be unlikely to care about supporting it. If the only thing average people knew about cars was that thousands of people a month die driving them, there'd be background checks and tax stamps to buy one. The reason why that doesn't happen is because most folks realize the benefits of having a car outweigh the drawbacks, because there are more cars then people.

Thats not the case with guns, especially in places like Chicago and NYC, because it's functionally easier to join the police department then endure the months of paperwork to buy a gun as an ordinary Joe. Not to trivialize LE by any stretch, but a gun to the average New Yorker is like a Bentley to the typical Biloxi resident. If you don't have one, you won't care if someone tries to ban it.

[jc000]

Yep. They say all kinds of things about Conservatives. In this case though I don't believe it's the Right pushing this agenda.

Despite what you hear 24-7, from what I can see the only people who feel they need to force their views on others are on the left.

Unless you consider not subsidizing someone's sex life, tyrannical.

[David S.]

Bull.

If someone is not exposed to the benefits of a civil right, they will be unlikely to care about supporting it. If the only thing average people knew about cars was that thousands of people a month die driving them, there'd be background checks and tax stamps to buy one. The reason why that doesn't happen is because most folks realize the benefits of having a car outweigh the drawbacks, because there are more cars then people.

Thats not the case with guns, especially in places like Chicago and NYC, because it's functionally easier to join the police department then endure the months of paperwork to buy a gun as an ordinary Joe. Not to trivialize LE by any stretch, but a gun to the average New Yorker is like a Bentley to the typical Biloxi resident. If you don't have one, you won't care if someone tries to ban it.

I'm not seeing how your statement contradicts mine. I see them as complimentary reasons why someone might be for gun control. The second amendment is irrelevant today AND lack of positive exposure to firearms.

[NETim]

I'm not seeing how your statement contradicts mine. I see them as complimentary reasons why someone might be for gun control. The second amendment is irrelevant today AND lack of positive exposure to firearms.

I'm not sure the 2A is "irrelevant." We have a right to self-defense. It's a basic human right. The 2A simply acknowledges that right and informs the Feds not to screw with it. Since firearms are the great equalizer and allow the weak to defend against the strong, guns = that right.

[David S.]

Despite what you hear 24-7, from what I can see the only people who feel they need to force their views on others are on the left.

Unless you consider not subsidizing someone's sex life, tyrannical.

Many, in fact, do. Many also believe that banning abortion and demanding the State codify marriage as "only between one man and one woman" are tyrannical. Liberals absolutely believe that the Right is "pushing an agenda" and "forc[ing] their views on others." They absolutely believe they are fighting tyranny from the Right.

All of us here agree on gun rights. All of us here interpret the 2nd amendment the same way and want broader 2A freedom. I'm just not sure how considering our opponents "tyrants screaming to get out" and "the only people who feels they need to impose their views on other people" moves the ball forward. Comments like these show a remarkable lack of self-awareness on the part of both sides (of any conversation) and serves only to shut down conversation.

[NETim]

Many, in fact, do. Many also believe that banning abortion and demanding the State codify marriage as "only between one man and one woman" are tyrannical. Liberals absolutely believe that the Right is "pushing an agenda" and "forc[ing] their views on others." They absolutely believe they are fighting tyranny from the Right.

All of us here agree on gun rights. All of us here interpret the 2nd amendment the same way and want broader 2A freedom. I'm just not sure how considering our opponents "tyrants screaming to get out" and "the only people who feels they need to impose their views on other people" moves the ball forward. Comments like these show a remarkable lack of self-awareness on the part of both sides (of any conversation) and serves only to shut down conversation.

Certainly there are the tyrants on the Right. I don't want the Feds in my bedroom or my neighbors' but I also don't want them in my garage, my bathroom, my gun vault or my local school district.

Vote on abortion/gay marriage/etc and get it all behind us. I can live with that. I don't really care. Until the courts get out of the legislation business, it's going to be ugly though.

And as a registered Independent/fierce libertarian type, I see the Left in this country as far more of a threat to my way of life than the Right. Since it's primarily the Left who appears to want to disarm me, I see them as the biggest threat to my personal freedom. They don't trust me with my guns, so I can't trust them with my government.

I want them both to leave me alone though. Just butt out.

[David S.]

:cool:

[SailDesign]

Ya know they say the same thing about Conservatives, right?

Yeah - we do. :P

[Stephen]

The Representative that proposed this bill just released the "Kelly Report: Gun Violence in America". http://robinkelly.house.gov/sites/robinkelly.house.gov/files/wysiwyg_uploaded/KellyReport_1.pdf

It's chocked full of emotional pleas, bullcrap statistics, references to sham studies, and demands for gun control. It goes without saying that they want more BG checks, registration, scary-looking rifle bans, mag bans, one-gun-per-month, mandatory stolen gun reporting, and smart guns. Here are a few of their more novel demands.

They would love to sue the gun industry out of existence.

The best way to give victims and survivors of gun violence their rights back is to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in its entirety

They would also like to make life harder for FFLs.

Under a federal law enacted in 1986, however, BATFE is limited in its ability to inspect and punish dealers who funnel guns to criminals. States could fill this void by requiring their own state license in addition to the federal license, and by engaging in routine inspection and oversight of dealers. But only 17 states require a state license, and only two mandate regular inspection of dealers. Enhanced oversight of dealers by law enforcement, including undercover sting operations, is associated with reduced trafficking.

Apparently we need laws regulating pistol-forum.com because we have a for sale section.

Websites should adopt tougher protocols to deter c rime... But online actors should meet the same public safety standards they are required to satisfy in the brick-and-mortar marketplace. Websites that host gun ads can do so by demanding transparency from their sellers and buyers, flagging suspicious behavior, and taking reasonable steps to ensure they are not facilitating illegal gun sales to criminals. Strategies some websites already employ include requiring visitors to register before viewing or posting ads; asking buyers and sellers to complete a verification process to confirm their identify; and providing features that allow users to easily flag suspicious activity for review by site administrators.

They also want to make DUIs a prohibiting offense if you're convicted of two of them.

Here are a couple of quotes about how gun owners and dealers are evil and get erections at the thought of selling guns to criminals:

Sometimes a prohibited purchaser will even specifi cally direct someone else to buy the gun for them. This is a so-called ‘‘straw purchase.’’ In one study, more than half of the dealers surveyed were willing to facilitate this kind of illegal sale.


A first-of-its-kind investigation by New York City in 2011 shed light on how online private sales play out in practice. The investigation found that a majority of private online sellers have no qualms about selling guns to people who admitted they were prohibited purchasers.

Results of a few Ctrl+F searches:
"loophole" 17 instances
"common sense" 10 instances
"corporate gun lobby" 2 instances
"epidemic" 8 instances

There's way too much silly stuff to quote, but its interesting to skim though.