» Shady Camden Gun Buyback Program Has Most Successful Day Ever In Wake Of Sandy Hook Barstool Sports: Philly

Shady Camden Gun Buyback Program Has Most Successful Day Ever In Wake Of Sandy Hook

DM - Impacted by the carnage in Sandy Hook, residents of Camden, New Jersey, turned in a record number of weapons in a gun buyback program over the weekend. ‘A lot of people said they don’t want the guns around the house now,’ said state Attorney General Jeffrey Chiesa as he announced the result of the program held Friday and Saturday at two Camden churches. The state brought in 1,137 guns, surpassing the previous record of 700 weapons from a 2009 Essex County event. Among them were scores of rifles, shotguns and pistols, sawed-off shotguns, a century-old antique weapon, a rifle used for hunting elephants and five fully automatic weapons. Some 90 per cent were in working condition.Many were illegal weapons under state laws; some were so-called community guns stashed around the neighborhood. NJ.com reported that those who came to the event were paid up to $250 per weapon with ‘no questions asked.’ Nearly all of the weapons are to be destroyed.

You know who didn’t give their guns away to a church for $250 and the feeling of doing something for the greater good? Criminals.

Not trying to sound like a pessimist or unsensitive but it seems like common knowledge that anybody whose job requires a gun (thief, drug dealer, etc) wouldn’t be as quick to give up the one piece of equipment that could be the difference between life or death.

Also, can you imagine how many murder weapons are sitting in that pile? What better way to toss aside the illegal six shooter you used to shoot Frankie OweDollars last February without the cops doing too much background work? After a little rubdown with the Lysol…seems like a no brainer to me.

AND they’re giving away $250 now? That’s a lot of money — where did it come from? Hell, I bet for that much crackheads were breaking into homes stealing guns just to give them away. Probably had a whole Camden middleman gun operation being run with people going door to door holding up strangers demanding their firearms.

Call me cynical if you want, but Camden + shady expensive gun buyback program =

By maurice posted December 19th, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Top 2 Comments

74 comments Sort by Popularity Sort by Date

Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by SoftAsSatinDavidPatten on December 19, 2012 at 10:50 am
Then answer me this....... The majority of gun owners are white, yet the majority of gunshot victims & perpetrators are black. Most guns owners live in rural areas, yet most homicides are in urban areas... The two cities with the highest murder rates are DC & Chicago, yet those two cities have the strictest gun ownership bans. How is this possible Mo?
- Up: 16
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by thegrandpoobaa on December 19, 2012 at 10:56 am
david patten you are a gentlemen and a scholar
- Up: 7
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by carport on December 19, 2012 at 10:56 am
Community guns stashed around the neighborhood? Is this Camden or San Andreas
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by Maury Ballstein on December 19, 2012 at 10:56 am
Frankie OweDollars? awful. But other than that it was decent blog I guess.
- Up: 0
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by maguna23 on December 19, 2012 at 11:02 am
David Patten, "majority of gun owners are white..." and "most gun owners live in rural areas?" Says who? I'd say most LEGAL gun owners are white and live in rural areas. Your drug dealers and hitmen most likely aren't registering their peace makers, so I don't think they'd show up in your stats,wherever it is you pulled those out of.
- Up: 1
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by englewood joyride on December 19, 2012 at 11:02 am
Absolutely right with that first line. Criminals already get their weapons illegally, why would any new laws or acts affect them in any way?
- Up: 7
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by jai bronson on December 19, 2012 at 11:06 am
Anyone who gave up their fully automatic gun for $250 is a fucking retard. Those things can sell for well over $10,000.
- Up: 7
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by pedrofartinez on December 19, 2012 at 11:06 am
FUCK YOUR OPINION
- Up: 3
- Down: 6
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by pedrofartinez on December 19, 2012 at 11:06 am
englewood joyride, thats really true with adam lanza.fucking gun retards
- Up: 3
- Down: 8
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by hardwhite on December 19, 2012 at 11:07 am
Finally a Maurice stance I can fully agree with. Gun laws and gun control will only keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens and give people the ILLUSION of safety and security.
- Up: 8
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by SoftAsSatinDavidPatten on December 19, 2012 at 11:10 am
maguna23 that's because legal, registered gun owners aren't the ones typically committing these violent crimes, hence the large disparity in my stats. The whole point I was to make was how the legal gun owners that advocates are trying to strip of their firearms aren't the problem. Its the criminals who obtain weapons illegally. No new laws will change that. As you can see DC & Chicago have already instituted firearm bans...yet there are still countless crimes committed with firearms.
- Up: 17
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by Fore on December 19, 2012 at 11:11 am
So being a drug dealer or a thief is a job in your world? I call it being a criminal.
- Up: 3
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by ct4now on December 19, 2012 at 11:11 am
good people with guns are still good people...
- Up: 5
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by snowdady on December 19, 2012 at 11:15 am
So.... where can I buy some of these guns that were turned in? Might as well make Camden some money while we're at it.
- Up: 5
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by ovechtrick8 on December 19, 2012 at 11:19 am
Gun restrictions don't mean shit. The law abiding citizens that apply for gun permits and carry weapons are rarely involved in gun violence. The gun violence all comes from the dumbass wannabe gangsters in the city who acquire than guns illegally and will continue to do this no matter how restricted the laws are.
- Up: 8
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 11:30 am
Hardwhite and ovechtrick8 , the last 5 mass deadly shootings in America were done by weapons that were purchased legally. This push for gun control IS NOT intended to take weapons out of the hands of law abiding citizens. It's the TYPE of guns that need to be less accessible. Wake the fuck up.
- Up: 4
- Down: 8
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by stevie on December 19, 2012 at 11:36 am
Bostonsbetter - your skewing the truth, in Sandy Hook's case, while the guns were PURCHASED legally, they did not belong to the shooter, who was under 21 and lawfully unable to possess any handgun in CT. These guns were stolen. And therein lies a big problem
- Up: 8
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 11:45 am
Stevie is correct.
- Up: 8
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by menotknow on December 19, 2012 at 11:45 am
Stevie is right adam lanza murdered his mother and stole her guns. the last time i checked murder theft does not equal legally obtained. I wish people would stop perpetuating the lie that the guns were legally acquired. The laws only apply to those who follow the laws
- Up: 8
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 11:46 am
No stevie boy, you my friend are reaching. If you read what I wrote I specifically say that they were purchased legally. And look what happened. This is the point that you gun nuts are missing. There is something fundamentally wrong when Suzy Cupcakes is allowed to buy a .223 assualt weapon and stash it in her house with an already fucked up kid living in the same house. THIS is the forefront of gun control. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason for that woman to have an assault rifle. NONE. Unless of course the russians are parachuting in like Red Dawn tomorrow. Do you believe that might happen asshole? Maybe, right. Fuck off.
- Up: 4
- Down: 5
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 11:48 am
In a perfect liberal "utopia" there would be absolutely ZERO guns. That is not reality. Gun bans do not work. The guns are out there already. Even if manufacturers stopped making guns, there are still plenty in circulation. So ban guns? Exactly what do you mean? I love how these liberal retards want to ban this and ban that, EXACTLY WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW!
- Up: 6
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 11:50 am
There's absolutely no reason for you to have a car that can travel faster than 75 mph. Driving at a high rate of speed is a huge factor in automobile fatalities, and only serves to kill more people. we should ban that too. Everyone has to drive a smart car, because that's all you really need. If you can't understand why someone should have or should want an assault rifle, or you were raised in a place where responsible gun ownership was not common (i.e. cities or the suburbs), you would not have had the exposure to gun related activities. You don't ban something because you don't understand it. You're taking the easy way out, and you're ignoring the fact that our society, in an idealistic, prosperous corner of America, created a monster. The gun was just the tool, it wasn't the symptom.
- Up: 7
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 12:00 pm
First and foremost browning my party affiliation means nothing but I am Republican that served 5 years in the Army. So you are wrong once again, an ongoing theme here. And dcubbz you can't be serious. I almost didn't respond but for some reason I think you are serious, which makes it that much more ignorant. We are now comparing a car to a .223 Assualt Rifle that shoots 60 rounds a minute and is intended to kill human beings? I understand assault rifles more than you and your entire nut job gun fanatic friends will ever now. That's a fucking fact. I know what they are intended for because I have used them in their intent. They do not belong in the hands of people that are using them for recreation. Buy a shotgun, buy a 9mm, buy a shooting rifle, buy a revolver. If you have a combat weapon in your hands, you should be in combat!!! I can;t believe that you don't understand this. I am dumbfounded by ignorance and society's refusal to admit the truth.
- Up: 5
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 12:06 pm
Its not a fact because you say it is. Its the same reasoning...assault rifles are only used to kill mass amounts of people, and are not necessary. Traveling at a high rate of speed kills mass amounts people, and is not necessary. Its using absurdity to illustrate the point that people will always get behind a ban on something that's not important to them if they can look like they care and then go back to being selfish pieces of shit, without analyzing the true root of the problem. Oh, and fyi, that .223 Bushmaster is not an assault rifle.
- Up: 4
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by provcity1 on December 19, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Dammit I actually agree with Mo....
- Up: 0
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by spghost on December 19, 2012 at 12:10 pm
I agree with bostonbetter....shotguns and hand guns should be allowed to own for hunting and gaming purposes...but assault rifles are for war purposes...maybe have shooting facilities for LEGAL gun owners to go to and shoot assault rifles there, but not allow them to buy them?
- Up: 3
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by stevie on December 19, 2012 at 12:14 pm
To think that this punk kid would not have done this because he only had access to semi auto handguns or shotguns...thats the reach dude. Where do you draw the line? If he had used a 12 gauage for this shooting, would we ban them? If he used the two sidearms he had with him instead of the rifle, should we ban those? You are setting a dangerous precedent, and this slope is slippery. You are operating under the assumption that if Nancy Lanza had a gun not named "bushmaster .223" that Adam wouldnt have done what he did. That, unfortunately, is the reach
- Up: 5
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 12:16 pm
spghost, theres a different between assault rifle and assault weapon. 99% of people who want to ban guns don't know the difference yet still draft and vote on gun legislation.
- Up: 2
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 12:17 pm
Haha!! You are talking about TRUTH? Are you fucking kidding me!?!? At the end of your bullshit rant you say that the .223 Bushmaster is not an assault weapon...Haha! You my friend are a fucking idiot. Gun manufacturers cater to new laws and inbred fools like yourself actually believe in it. I can't even believe I am entertaining this but the intent of people traveling at a high rate of speed is to get somewhere faster. The intent of a man shooting an assault weapon in a class room is to kill people. WAKE UP. But guess what my friend, the majority will win this debate when they put in a assault ban in the next few months. And you can bitch and cry all you want. Nobody will give a shit about what you will be saying about your second amendment right. Live with that fuckface
- Up: 3
- Down: 5
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 12:17 pm
And to clarify, I'm all for gun control on the regulation side...but all out bans don't make any sense.
- Up: 1
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 12:17 pm
bostonsbetter2, I'd really like to take you up on that bet that you think you know more than me about ANY firearm. I served to in the USAF and am a current FFL licensee with 30 years gun experience. So Poo on you. Take the scenerio of a teacher walking a group of students down a sidewalk. If some whack job decides to take them all out with his car, he could. Then what? Ban cars? The point is anything can be used as an assault weapon in the wrong hands. Its already a fact that cars kill more people than guns a year (UNLESS YOU ARE GOING TO INCLUDE THE ILLEGAL GUNS, USED FOR KILLIN IN CRIMES IN DRUG DEALS, ETC) A Baseball Bat is an assault weapon and can kill if used for that intention. YOU SIR are the one with the warped state of mind, living in utopia, and it is still our right as responsible americans to own any type semi automatic we want. YOU ARE REFERRING TO FULLY AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. You know, hold the trigger back and spray. Civilians can't own them. What is your solution???? Take 3 million AR's currently in circulation away from the responsible public for the doings of .00000000001% of the public? Sounds like a liberal idea. And the guy STOLE the weopon he used! I'm not against certain new comprehensive rules or laws, but a total ban against the gun is just wrong. And if you go take them from the honest citizens, I guess the ones that don't turn them in are instantly ciriminals in your book? It probably will come down to registration of some sort, then they know where they are, and can take them. Then you'll get your way.
- Up: 8
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by rvahokie on December 19, 2012 at 12:17 pm
Those of you who drop the pejorative of gun nut against those of us who believe in the responsible practice of our Second Amendment Rights, consider this:Why do I own an SW M&P-15T (5.56mm) rifle? 1) Because I can as I have a crystal-clear record, and live in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2) Because Eugene Stoner designed a damn good rifle back in the 1950s; one that is very accurate and comfortable to shoot. I could care less that some wanker on cnn denotes my rifle as scary-looking, impractical and overkill. 3) I enjoy target shooting in a safe and responsible manner, and gladly share my hobby to those with an innocent interest. Guess what, more than a few ladies love to go shooting with us. 4) I hope to God I never have to use it for self-defense, but seeing as I train with its military counterpart (the M16/M4) in the Army I know it's the right tool for the job (otherwise I'll turn to my pistol or shotgun). The police and military can't be everywhere at once to defend the citizenry. 5) Because I went to Virginia Tech, and have friends that wish they could've shot dead the evil piece of shit before he finished his rampage (killing 32 of my fellow Hokies).This along with other events in my life taught me the worth of self-defense. When it comes down to self-defense, I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers, than carried by 6 of my loved ones.
- Up: 10
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 12:21 pm
The real issues are the decline of the family structure, violent video games (and they said he was always playing the most violent one), and kids knowing they basically have no future. Add to that internet and cell phones which all have some effect. Its so much easier to degrade someone via text or email or facebook. This kid was in a bad place and took it out on defenseless human beings because he was a fucking coward himself.
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Stevie I agree with you in that respect. I understand that people will do horrible things with guns, regardless of the type. But all the reports indicated that he shot HUNDREDS of rounds withing 10 minutes or so of killing little kids. That is not possible with a 9 or a shotgun. It's just not. People will still be murdered without assault weapons, I understand that. It's the amount of people withing one incident that could change by banning assault weapons and 30 round clips.
- Up: 3
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 12:23 pm
And bostonbetter, you seem like the type that SHOULDN'T be able to pass a background check to me.
- Up: 7
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by clark_griswold on December 19, 2012 at 12:26 pm
bostonsbetter you sir, are a fucking idiot. I'll bet you have never served a day.. 60 rounds a min is an ignorant enough statement to show me that.
- Up: 8
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by pedrofartinez on December 19, 2012 at 12:28 pm
who knew so many gun and bible toting rednecks visited this site
- Up: 4
- Down: 6
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by 28ontheway on December 19, 2012 at 12:28 pm
preach boston. Come on people. if someone breaks into your house, and you have weapons training, do you really need a machine gun to take him down? If you know what you're doing a handgun works just fine. No sane liberal is talking about banning all guns. Just guns that seem to serve no other purpose except for mass killing. You want a shotgun or a rifle to hunt? A handgun to defend yourself and your family? Knock yourself out. No one needs a machine gun to hunt or defend themselves.PS - you ever see black or hispanic men go on mass shooting sprees? I don't think so....
- Up: 4
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 12:32 pm
Thing is, now all the crooks have an AK or AR, so to protect your home with a lil ol 38 revolver?
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by clark_griswold on December 19, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Weapons banned under the assault weapons ban were used in the columbine shooting bro. Right in the middle of the fucking ban, looks like that was effective. Secondly stats show that during that time shootings did not decrease, nor did the avg amount of bullets people were shot with..
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by queen lundqvist on December 19, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Since this is Camden I'm going to assume the criminals all have more than one firearm and most likely got rid of the ones with bodies on them for a quick $250 per
- Up: 1
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by pedrofartinez on December 19, 2012 at 12:33 pm
lol junglebunny , good luck trying to beat the US government in fucking WAR with your gun club buddies. You dinosaurs are so fucking out of date its ridiculous
- Up: 3
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Browningman when it's all said it done, you and the gun toting Americans that believe that their own government will some day need to be fought back by patriots like yourself will have to surrender your assault weapons. And it will be a step in the right direction. A solution? Not entirely, but a step nonetheless. NRA has 4 million members, unfortunately for you and all your cousins, America has 300 million members that are fed up with your fucking bullshit and the twisted 2nd Amendment. It's not 1791 anymore buddy. Shit needs to change before we bury another 20 children
- Up: 3
- Down: 6
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by clark_griswold on December 19, 2012 at 12:38 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31vm3-BQRJUyeah pedro.. pretty petty firepower
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by junglebunny on December 19, 2012 at 12:44 pm
28 you are a typical asshole who knows nothing about gun laws. AR15s are semi auto, machine guns are highly regulated by the BATFE and are well over $10,000 and are fully automatic. What the fucks the difference between one 30 round mag and three 10 round mags, either way people will die and disarming the good people only leaves us unsafe.
- Up: 5
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 12:46 pm
So ok boston, taking into account your your unlimited knowledge of military weapons, you would take a semi-automatic bushmaster into combat? An assault rifle, by definition, is a select-fire (either fully automatic or burst capable) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. An M14 is classified as an assault weapon.
- Up: 2
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 12:55 pm
My unlimited knowledge cubz. I served 3 years in the Big Red One, First Infantry Division and 2 years in the 10th Mountain Division so my commanders would be mildly disappointed that I have unlimited military knowledge according to you. Semi-automatic, functionality meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action. Greater than 10 round magazines would also be classified as an attribute to assault weapons junglebunny. Like I said to Browning, NRA has 4 million members, unfortunately for you and all your inbred cousins, America has 300 million members that are fed up with your bullshit and what you believe to be your god given right to own assault weapons. You will lose your battle. That is a fact
- Up: 2
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by dcubbz on December 19, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Obviously a limited understanding of the english language. The question was, would you carry a semi-automatic bushmaster into combat? You stated that assault rifles have no purpose other than combat, so obviously you think a semi-automatic bushmaster is a combat worthy firearm that serves no other purpose.
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 1:06 pm
EXACTLY junglebunnny!! You of all people should not be able to easily get 30 rounds mags. That is what this debate is about you fool. The sale of weapons at gun shows and the internet need to be closely regulated so idiots like yourself who think they will some day have to protect yourself from the Red Coats on Bunker Hill will not be able to get military grade weapons for the hell of it. You are making my point. Thanks
- Up: 4
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Right JB, same in NY.
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by browningman on December 19, 2012 at 1:16 pm
We have "preban" AR's in NY (mfg before 1989 or 94 I think). They can legally use a 30 round mag. Thats why the mags are obtainable here and in MA.
- Up: 4
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 1:17 pm
Cubz, if needed to. Absolutely, I could use a bushmaster in combat. No question about it. It is a basically a "civilian style" M-16. You see, these companies just modify the make of the rifle to dodge restrictions and sell it to civilians. They know it will make them billions and people will buy them. There intent is the same. To kill human beings.
- Up: 4
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 1:23 pm
JB, the point is the accessibility of military style weapons in the hands of the wrong people. Will there be shootings again that will kill children senselessly? Of course. But not in the way this happened. He shot HUNDREDS of rounds in the time that the call was made and the cops arriving 13 minutes later. Would the damage or the amount of dead children been the same if his mother only had a handgun? I believe there wouldn't have been. And my opinion is not alone on that. That is why there will be changes
- Up: 4
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by 30dayfreetrial on December 19, 2012 at 1:33 pm
I've never seen so many false equivalencies in one place. Fucking morons.
- Up: 3
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by 30dayfreetrial on December 19, 2012 at 1:39 pm
And the pedantry of gun nuts just blows my mind. Mouth-breathing, abject idiots that still can rattle off the semantics between every type of firearm.
- Up: 4
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by nutupormoveon on December 19, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Suddenly, Barack Obama wants to ban AK-47 “assault” weapons because they belong only on “the battlefield of war,” even though the LEGAL AK-47s in the U.S. are dressed-up 22-caliber semi-automatic rifles NOT used in war. New York’s Nanny Mayor Mike Bloomberg wants America’s police to go on strike until the federal government adopts stricter gun laws, although I would expect that if his own security police went on strike he’d become a little nervous. Lanny Davis, former special counsel to Bill Clinton, told Sean Hannity on the radio Tuesday that the federal government should be tracking the purchase of weapons and ammunition to identify “disturbing trends” … you know, like being prepared for the country to fall apart or Barack Obama to join the UN in trying to ban weapons.Let’s look at some facts about gun deaths in this country, facts the left-wing gun-grabbing fascists among us don’t include in their narrative — because facts don’t fit what they hope to achieve.Let’s start with James Holmes, who murdered 12 people and wounded 58 others during a shooting last Friday in Aurora, Colorado. James Holmes did not use an AK-47, Mr. President. He murdered and injured people using an AR-15 with a 100-round drum, a shotgun, and a semi-automatic pistol. The AR-15 Holmes used was legal; it was not an “assault” weapon because it was not fully automatic; it was a semi-automatic rifle. Obama would have Americans believe that any AK-47 or AR-15 stored at home in their gun cabinets is an illegal weapon; they’re not. The Clinton-era ban on “assault’ style weapons in this country sunset in 2004, but it is still illegal to own an AK-47 or AR-15 that has been modified to fully automatic fire. So any time Obama or anyone else on the left rants about “assault weapons” used on the “field of battle” roaming “the streets of this country” all by themselves, remember this: The semi-automatic weapons in this country are glorified .22s. You can fire off rounds from a semi-automatic “assault” style weapon just as quickly as you can a semi-automatic Glock handgun: BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PULL THE TRIGGER EACH TIME YOU WANT THE WEAPON TO FIRE.Here’s another fact the disingenuous left doesn’t want you to know about. Only about 1 percent, yes ONE PERCENT, of the gun deaths in this country can be attributed to the use of ALL TYPES of rifles and shotguns, let alone semi-automatic rifles, which the lapdog media and the fascist left will always refer to as “assault” weapons because the word gets stuck in your conscience.
- Up: 3
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by nutupormoveon on December 19, 2012 at 2:37 pm
While we’re on the subject of the numbers of gun deaths in this country. There were 12,996 homicides in 2010 that occurred when someone used a firearm to do the killing; 831 of those deaths occurred from the bullets fired from rifles and shotguns. Furthermore, murderers use “assault” style weapons so infrequently to kill people, the FBI doesn’t even track them in a category separate from “rifles.” In comparison, 1,704 people were killed in 2010 with knives, and 745 people were killed when someone beat them to death.I guess that means that the police should go on strike until the federal government bans all kitchen knives, hands, fists, and feet. Can somebody please tell Mayor Nanny Bloomberg that the Supreme Court ruled 7 years ago that the police aren’t even required to protect people?Let’s get further into the left’s hypocrisy. In 1976, Washington, D.C., passed a total ban on guns within the limits of the District of Criminals, presumably to protect Curroptocrats from American gun owners fed-up with their raping of this country; 14 years later, murders in D.C. had skyrocketed. Naturally, after the gun ban was lifted in 2008, murder rates dropped 25 percent.
- Up: 2
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by nutupormoveon on December 19, 2012 at 2:37 pm
You won’t hear that in the left’s narrative. And I don’t even need to go into the left ignoring murder rates in Obama’s Chicago backyard, where some of the strictest gun controls in the nation violate the 2nd Amendment. All you need to do is watch the nightly news.I also won’t go into the number of illegal guns used to commit most murders (estimates indicated about 80 percent); all you need to do is read anything about Fast and Furious and the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Yes. The federal government did build that.So let’s get to the heart of what really kills far more Americans every year than any nutcase wielding any type of gun. Numerous medical organizations estimate that medical mistakes kill nearly 300,000 people every year, though that figure may be closer to 500,000. Meanwhile, 32,310 people died on the highways last year (you know, the roads Obama built so your small business could become successful) in motorcycle and automobile accidents — almost 20,000 more people than those dying at the hands of a murderer firing a gun.All of which means, I would be far safer if I never went to the doctor or drove to work. So, Mr. President, I’ll be keeping my AK-47 until you come for it. And Nanny Bloomberg? When you pry my weapon from cold dead hand, make sure you don’t spill the Big Gulp in my other hand.
- Up: 3
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by pmrkingston on December 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm
blah blah blah....my opinion....you suck...fuck you.....blah blah blah.....libtard.....fuck off cunt.....blah blah blah....well, i guess i see your point, i have changed my mind. thank you
- Up: 4
- Down: 1
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bugheavy24 on December 19, 2012 at 3:13 pm
do you know what could keep illegal and legal firearms from causing these awful situations? restricting the bullets. lets see some dumbass criminal who cant even talk manufacture a working bullet that doesnt blow his hand off.
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by cfoggot on December 19, 2012 at 3:30 pm
Is chicago a fucking island? People can bring guns from outside the city, morons. Not an effective argument, not saying I want stricter gun laws tho
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bostonsbetter2 on December 19, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Hey by nutupormoveon, for christ sake let's keep your rant to 6000 words. Not one fucking person is reading that shit anyways. The ban is happening. The people have spoken. Go get fucked.
- Up: 3
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by junglebunny on December 19, 2012 at 5:32 pm
What makes an assault rifle just that is a collapsible buttstock, flash hider, bayonet lug, pistol grip, and a high cap mag..those features are evil and scary to the liberals yet a hunting rifle is more accurate and powerful then the .223/5.56 NATO. I recently sold mine but they are fucking fun to shoot and fuck you if you think the 2nd amendment is for hunting, it's to overthrow the government again if it becomes tyrannical.
- Up: 7
- Down: 4
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by junglebunny on December 19, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Also if you fags took a class in law all these AR15s that are legal now would be protected under ex post facto. I also live in MA and we STILL live under the Clinton Assault weapon ban and I can still readily find pre banned 30 round mags that were made before 1994. It's so fuckin clear why the right to bear arms is 2nd, a fucking piece of paper doesn't protect your life and liberty, it's only defended with a rifle.
- Up: 4
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by junglebunny on December 19, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Boston, what's your solution when the next shooting happens with shotguns or handguns? Also thank you for your service to this country, but a lot of my friends who are ex combat vets have ARs and won't give them up.
- Up: 6
- Down: 2
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by 28ontheway on December 19, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Junglecunt, did I mention any specific type of gun? I said machine guns you illiterate pile of crusty semen
- Up: 4
- Down: 3
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bsubear on December 19, 2012 at 8:02 pm
Bostonsbetter2 thanks for your service.. I have to agree with you. tell me what you think of this.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE2vR4RSOyU
- Up: 1
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by bsubear on December 19, 2012 at 8:06 pm
Oh hey 28ontheway go to africa you stupid ignorant fuck. Kony is black he killed thousands. You are another trashbag of society and should realize its time to grow up. Don't make this a race issue for a second. Oh and the those Hispanic men that come from the Cartels in Mexico they shoot people to , asshole
- Up: 4
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by midwestjd on December 19, 2012 at 8:57 pm
@junglebunny, I have taken all of the law classes. I think your take on the law could use a refresh. It wasn't until the 80's (1980's) that the readers of the 2nd amendment inflected some kind of meaningful protection for the citizenry. Give the constitution a reread- most originalists will tell you that the protection covers the militia. SCOTUS hasn't granted the right you seem to think exists. Also, ex post facto doesn't apply here. If some "ban" were to take place, the commerce clause would allow it; you could likely own it; legislators are smarter than you. They'd ban shooting it or having it in a fireable set-up. Quit calling people fags, fag.
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by junglebunny on December 19, 2012 at 9:29 pm
republicans own the house it will never pass.
- Up: 1
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by TheUserError on December 20, 2012 at 3:05 am
The redcoats were fought on breeds hill, not bunker hill.
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by burgerbumps on December 20, 2012 at 10:47 am
This guy have take ALL of the law classes. every single one? like there's no more to take because you've taken them ALL. cool story bro
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by burgerbumps on December 20, 2012 at 10:48 am
has taken* taking a lap. cool story bro
- Up: 0
- Down: 0
Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
by edumacated on December 20, 2012 at 5:48 pm
BostonBetter- " I understand assault rifles more than you and your entire nut job gun fanatic friends will ever now. That's a fucking fact. I know what they are intended for because I have used them in their intent."You want to know how I know you are a liar? Becuase a semi-auto .223 AR could unload about 600 rounds a minute, not 60 you idiot. This is without the barrel melting, of course. I guess you do know more than all of us "nut jobs"
- Up: 0
- Down: 0