Well, obviously this gun nut in Wisconsin broke Frum’s Rules. Who does he think he is? Putting his own safety ABOVE David Frum’s feelings?
A trio of young adult males targeted a home in Mellen township in Menominee County Wisconsin yesterday, either thinking the home was unoccupied, or that they could surprise and overpower the homeowner.
It should be noted that Fulop is a member of Nanny Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns, so this story I found at Bearing arms is no surprise
Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop is putting the lives of his officers at risk by telling manufacturers they must comply with authoritarian “social responsibility questions” to bid on city firearms and ammunition contracts.
New Jersey’s second-largest city is adopting a novel approach to gun control by requiring weapons-makers bidding on municipal contracts to answer questions about their positions on gun safety issues.
Jersey City, a city of 250,000 across the Hudson River from Manhattan, is believed to be the first U.S. municipality to incorporate social responsibility questions into public contract bids. Mayor Steven Fulop says he wants municipalities to use their purchasing power to influence America’s gun-safety conversation.
The bid specification going out Wednesday — for roughly $200,000 worth of guns and $150,000 in ammunition — includes six questions measuring vendors’ gun safety record. One asks whether the manufacturer would commit to preventing its weapons from appearing in violent video games. Another asks what the company does to combat illegal gun trafficking.
“I think we can reshape the dialogue based on how we award contracts,” Fulop told The Associated Press. “We can’t do it ourselves. The hope is that will be replicated in other urban areas, and that we can get them to lead where Washington couldn’t.”
Here are the “socially responsible questions” from Fulop, a member of Michael Bloomberg’s citizen control group, “Mayors Against Illegal Guns.”
– What do you do to combat illegal gun trafficking and illegal gun crime? – Do you manufacturer and sell assault weapons for civilian use? – Do you agree not to sell certain models of firearms for civilian use? – Are you requiring your dealers to conduct background checks? – Do you fund research related to gun violence and smart gun technology? – Will you commit to prohibiting your brand name from being used in violent video games?
Social Responsibility huh? That is what these questions are supposed to be about? Let us look at these questions
What do you do to combat illegal gun trafficking and illegal gun crime?
Illegal gun crime? As opposed to what, legal gun crimes? What an inane question.
Do you manufacturer and sell assault weapons for civilian use?
Assault weapons? What exactly are those? What clueless Statists like Fulop call assault weapons are really just rifles, so this is a meaningless question. Many gun makers do make weapons for the military, but those are not sold to civilians, and Fulop should know that.
Do you agree not to sell certain models of firearms for civilian use?
Read my statement above.
Are you requiring your dealers to conduct background checks?
Actually federal law requires background checks, it is not anything gun makers have a say in. I have bought two guns this year, both times I had to pass a background check.
As Bob Owens points out, what gun maker is going to even bother selling to Jersey City as long as this buffoon is mayor?
It would be market suicide for FNH USA, Glock, Heckler & Koch, Ruger ,Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson, or any other manufacturer to pander to Fulop’s citizen control questionnaire to sell a few hundred guns. Does any manufacturer want to take that sort of risk in a day and age where Second Amendment supporters are networked via the Internet, and in a much less forgiving mood?
Kentucky Democrat Alison Grimes is hoping to defeat incumbent Senator Mitch McConnell come election time, and she (or her handlers) evidently decided that this would be the way to win over potential voters and Second Amendment supporters:
Unfortunately for Ms. Grimes, all that photo accomplished does is confirm that Dems who want to take away guns for our safety know very little about, you know, actualgun safety.
Oh my, go read the rest of the Tweets mocking this buffoon. Eyes and Ears Alison, Eyes and Ears
Strobridge Elementary School in Hayward, California will host a toy gun buyback this Saturday. Children who turn in their toy guns will be entered for a chance to win a bicycle, so it’s less of a buyback and more like an expensive raffle.
Charles Hill, the school’s principal, explained, “Playing with toys guns, saying ‘I’m going to shoot you,’ desensitizes them, so as they get older, it’s easier for them to use a real gun.”
Two things here. First off playing with toy guns has been going on in America for decades upon decades. Before their were toy guns, kids used sticks, fingers and anything else that looked like a gun. See kids play games, it is natural and normal, which is probably why Hill takes issue with it. Secondly, Hill apparently thinks using a real gun is necessarily bad. But that is absurd. Millions of Americans have used real guns to protect themselves. Yes, including many kids. That is not a bad thing, that is a good thing, and Hill should have the ability to see that. But, moral clarity and objective thinking is not something Liberals excel at. It interferes with their emotion-driven opinions, and that makes them fussy.
Now, I am not saying that we should not teach kids about gun safety, that is a major priority, and groups like the NRA are at the forefront of that effort. Of course, I would wager that Hill loathes the NRA, and would never opt for having them talk gun safety to his students. He would likely prefer to cast blame on the NRA, as well as the millions of responsible gun owners than actually learn from either. That is sad.
The other sad aspect of programs like this one is that they are used to indoctrinate kids to hate guns. The message is simple, guns are bad, even guns that are not guns. Even the word gun is now bad somehow. We know the many stories of kids suspended because they pointed a chicken strip and said “bang”, or drew a picture of a soldier with a gun, or brought a water pistol to school, or chewed a Pop Tart into the “shape of a gun”. These cases amount to child abuse, and nothing more. This must be stopped, and now. If state legislatures want to do something positive, they can start by cracking down of such school policies. As Stacey McCain puts it, why aren’t you home schooling yet?
Years ago, someone explained to me what’s wrong with the system: Government school bureaucrats are not interested in teaching facts.
What they are interested in teaching is attitudes.
Once you understand that, everything else makes sense.
State Representative James White hopes a new bill he’s proposed will help more high school students across the state handle guns properly.
It would give schools the choice to offer a class, taught by a certified concealed handgun license instructor or peace officer, on how safely to use guns like pistols, revolvers and shotguns.
Gabriel Rivera, a Douglas MacArthur High School student, believes the classes could stop tragedies like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
“It’s not who can use it, bad or good. It’s who can use it properly,” said Rivera. “It think it’s a good way for people to be safe with weapons and guns in general.”
But should guns be in the hands of students, some of whom are barely even teenagers? Peggy Weyel says yes. She runs a hunter education program for children as young as nine.
“I’ve hunted with several of the grandchildren of the people who have been on leases with. And those kiddos are some of the safest hunters I’ve ever seen,” states Weyel.
Like I said, Libs will flip out over this. I can hear them now bemoaning the thought of a teenager handling a gun. Funny, Libs want high school kids to handle, and have condoms, they want them to be educated about sex, and safe sex. But they do not want them handling guns or learning gun safety? Maybe if we promise to put condoms on the guns, then Libs will approve? No problem!
Vice President Biden delivered a message for rural America: He’s coming to talk about gun violence.
“I’m coming, I’m coming,” Biden said here after saying he’d read a skeptical comment in the local newspaper about the White House outreach to rural areas. “The one thing I want to make clear is this is, this message of rational gun safety is a message that will be embraced by rural communities as well as urban communities simply because it makes sense. But we cannot wait. The still voices of those children require us, requires us to speak now.”
In a Pew Research Poll listing 21 things the public believes should be government priorities for 2013, passing more gun laws is number 18 out of 21.
The majority of Americans simply do not see gun control as a pressing concern problem like President Obama and the Democrats do.
Instead, the American people are worried about the economy (first on the list), jobs (second), the deficit (third), and terrorism (fourth).
So, maybe it is not about the will of the people, but the fetish for control that Democrats have. Speaking of control, guess which issue is dead last on the list. Go on, guess, here is a hint, Al Gore would be very upset.