Post: #1

This is happening right now.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2...age-sit-in

Quote:Demanding Action On Gun Control, House Democrats Stage Sit-In
June 22, 201612:01 PM ET
EYDER PERALTA

Demanding action on gun control, about 30 Democratic members of the United States House of Representatives are staging a sit-in.


Rep. John Yarmuth ✔ @RepJohnYarmuth
I'm on the House floor with @repjohnlewis & Dems staging a sit-in to demand action on commonsense gun legislation
11:34 AM - 22 Jun 2016
3,319 3,319 Retweets 3,658 3,658 likes
"Lawmakers are grouped in the well of the chamber, in front of the speaker's dais and in chairs in the front row," NPR's Sue Davis reports. "Some members are literally sitting on the floor of the House."

When the House was gaveled back into session a little after noon, Rep. Ted Poe, a Republican from Texas who was overseeing proceedings, was shouted down by members.

"No bill, no break," they chanted. The House is scheduled to break beginning on Sunday.

A prayer was said and members recited the Pledge of Allegiance, but once it became clear that regular business would not take place, Poe called for another recess.

AshLee Strong, a spokesperson for House Speaker Paul Ryan, said the House "cannot operate without members following the rules of the institution, so the House has recessed subject to the call of the chair."

Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat from Georgia, announced the sit in earlier this morning.


"We have lost hundreds and thousands of innocent people to gun violence — tiny little children, babies, students and teachers, mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, daughters and sons, friends and neighbors — and what has this body done?" Lewis said flanked by fellow Democrats. "Mr. Speaker nothing. "Not one thing."

Lewis' colleagues in the Senate held the floor for nearly 15 hours last week demanding much the same thing. Senate Democrats eventually succeeded in getting a vote, but all four gun control measures failed.

Bunch of pansies. I thought politicians were supposed to behave respectably, not like 60s radicals or college students demanding a safe space.

Post: #2

Shouted down? Is that normal for the house? These guys have been taking talking points from the sjws.

Post: #3

Scott Adam's blog post today on gun control is fabulous. It contains a great one liner, (already tweeted by Cernovich, and should be tweeted by everyone), "Democrats use guns to shoot innocents; we call this crime. But Republicans use guns for sport and self-defense."

If I were a senator, I would say, "You guys are right. Let's pass a bill limiting gun control laws to only those states that voted Democrat in the last two presidential elections. We'll leave the rest of the states alone."

Post: #4

From the CNN report

Quote:And former President Bill Clinton tweeted his encouragement, writing, "This is leadership" and linking to Lewis' tweet about the sit-in.

Typical liberal response when they don't get their way, they throw a tantrum.

Post: #5

just another day of "due process getting in the way" of democrats.

Post: #6

(06-22-2016 12:13 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Scott Adam's blog post today on gun control is fabulous. It contains a great one liner, (already tweeted by Cernovich, and should be tweeted by everyone), "Democrats use guns to shoot innocents; we call this crime. But Republicans use guns for sport and self-defense."

If I were a senator, I would say, "You guys are right. Let's pass a bill limiting gun control laws to only those states that voted Democrat in the last two presidential elections. We'll leave the rest of the states alone."

Indeed, brilliant article
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/14630708845...in-the-usa

Why Gun Control Can’t Be Solved in the USA

On average, Democrats (that’s my team*) use guns for shooting the innocent. We call that crime.

On average, Republicans use guns for sporting purposes and self-defense.

If you don’t believe me, you can check the statistics on the Internet that don’t exist. At least I couldn’t find any that looked credible.

But we do know that race and poverty are correlated. And we know that poverty and crime are correlated. And we know that race and political affiliation are correlated. Therefore, my team (Clinton) is more likely to use guns to shoot innocent people, whereas the other team (Trump) is more likely to use guns for sporting and defense.

That’s a gross generalization. Obviously. Your town might be totally different.

So it seems to me that gun control can’t be solved because Democrats are using guns to kill each other – and want it to stop – whereas Republicans are using guns to defend against Democrats. Psychologically, those are different risk profiles. And you can’t reconcile those interests, except on the margins. For example, both sides might agree that rocket launchers are a step too far. But Democrats are unlikely to talk Republicans out of gun ownership because it comes off as “Put down your gun so I can shoot you.”

Let’s all take a deep breath and shake off the mental discomfort I just induced in half of my readers. You can quibble with my unsupported assumptions about gun use, but keep in mind that my point is about psychology and about big group averages. If Republicans think they need guns to protect against Democrats, that’s their reality. And if Democrats believe guns make the world more dangerous for themselves, that is their reality. And they can both be right. Your risk profile is different from mine.

So let’s stop acting as if there is something like “common sense” gun control to be had if we all act reasonably. That’s not an option in this case because we all have different risk profiles when it comes to guns. My gun probably makes me safer, but perhaps yours makes you less safe. You can’t reconcile those interests.

Our situation in the United States is that people with different risk profiles are voting for their self-interests as they see it. There is no compromise to be had in this situation unless you brainwash one side or the other to see their self-interest differently. And I don’t see anyone with persuasion skills trying to do that on either side.

Fear always beats reason. So as long as Democrats are mostly using guns to shoot innocent people (intentionally or accidentally) and Republicans are mostly using guns for sport or self-defense, no compromise can be had.

If we had a real government – the kind that works – we would acknowledge that gun violence is not one big problem with one big solution. It is millions of people with different risk profiles voting their self-interest as they see it.

So stop acting like one side is stupid. Both sides of the gun issue are scared, and both have legitimate reasons to be that way. Neither side is “right.”

Post: #7

(06-22-2016 12:13 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Scott Adam's blog post today on gun control is fabulous. It contains a great one liner, (already tweeted by Cernovich, and should be tweeted by everyone), "Democrats use guns to shoot innocents; we call this crime. But Republicans use guns for sport and self-defense."

If I were a senator, I would say, "You guys are right. Let's pass a bill limiting gun control laws to only those states that voted Democrat in the last two presidential elections. We'll leave the rest of the states alone."

I wonder if Scott Adams read this recent article from "The Truth About Guns"?

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/06...filiation/

Quote:Firearms-Related Homicides: Democratic vs. Republican Affiliation

TTAG reader RN writes:

Gun control is a huge political issue right now (especially right after the mass shooting in Orlando). Democrats are all about infringing on Second Amendment rights. They claim that Republicans and NRA members are mainly responsible for “gun violence” and are the reason why “common sense gun reform” laws need to be enacted. Like everyone else on TTAG, I had my doubts about their claims and decided to crunch some numbers to see which political party’s members commit more firearms murders.

I began by finding the most recent number of firearms murders (strictly murders, this doesn’t include suicides or justifiable homicides). The source I used: the Center for Disease Control WISHERS website. I chose the most recent year they had available (2014). According to the CDC, there were 10,945 murders involving firearms in 2014.

Next I needed to find an accurate source for murder rates by race. This needs to be broken down by race because each race will have different murder rates and voting rates, which is important for getting an final product based on political affiliation. The source I used was the US Department of Justice’s homicide report published in 2011. The information contained in this report was averaged from 1980 to 2008. Here are the murder rates that can be found on the third page of the report:

52.5% were black perpetrators

45.3% were white perpetrators

2.2% were perpetrators of other races

Lastly, I needed to find the political affiliation for these races. The source I used was Cornell University. I chose to use information from the last presidential election (2012). Here are the voting rates for the Democrats broken down by race:

93% of blacks voted Democrat

39% of whites voted Democrat

67% of everyone else (average of all races other than black/white) voted Democrat

With numbers in hand, I began my calculations. First up was calculating the number of firearms murders by race. There are a few assumptions in this calculation. For on thing, it assumes that the murder rate from the 1980 to 2008 time period is somewhat correct for 2014 (the year I’m using for firearm murders). It also assumes that there is a 1:1 victim to perpetrator ratio (we all know that this isn’t always true, i.e. mass murders by one perpetrator, but this is the easiest way to compute this information). Here are my calculations for 2014 firearm murders by race:

5,746.12 firearms murders by blacks (10,945 x .525)

4,958.09 firearm murders by whites (10,945 x .453)

240.79 firearm murders by others (10,945 x .022)

After this was complete, I needed to bring in another variable: political affiliation.

This calculation would give me the total number of firearms murders for Democrats (this political party is a continuation from the calculations above) in 2014 broken down by race. Again, there are a few assumptions here:

the 2012 political party affiliation is correct for 2014 (the year I’m using for firearm murders)
there is a 1:1 political party affiliation to each perpetrator ratio (we also know this isn’t completely correct because it assumes that every perpetrator belongs to one of these 2 political parties). We have to make this assumption because there is no other data to go off of for this portion of the analysis and I believe that any error caused by it would only be +/- a few percentage points (hardly enough to have any substantial influence over the outcome).
Here are my calculations for 2014 firearm murders by race and Democrat affiliation (using this party again to remain consistent):

5,343.89 firearm murders by black Democrats (5,746.12 x .93)

1,933.66 firearm murders by white Democrats (4,958.09 x .39)

161.33 firearm murders by other Democrats (240.79 x .67)

Time to add these up to find the total number of firearm murders that were perpetrated by Democrats in 2014:

7,438.88 total firearm murders by Democrats (5,343.89 + 1,933.66 + 161.33)

Lastly I found the percentage of firearm murders that were perpetrated by Democrats in 2014:

67.97% gun murders by democrats (7,438.88/10,945)

According to my calculations, about 68% of all firearm murders in 2014 were committed by Democrats. Only 32% of all firearms murders in 2014 were committed by Republicans. This means that Democrats committed twice the number of firearm related murders than Republicans (68/32 = 2.125). This leads to three very important conclusions:

Republicans aren’t to blame for the number of firearm murders, as the Democrats try to claim
If Democrats stopped shooting people, we could reduce our firearm related murders by almost 70%
Guns aren’t the problem, Democrats are.

Post: #8

Couple of rather detailed articles and I thought relevant as it pertains to murder rates etc.

20 yrs of FBI data show "assault rifles" not a danger

Quote:Since 1995 (the year after the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban), the FBI has maintained a very detailed list of how many people have died at the hands of assault weapons and/or rifles, which are merged into the same group. Therefore, we can make a solid comparison on what gun violence looks like.

In 2014, you are 67% less likely to be murdered by an assault weapon or rifle than you were in 1995.

How many ARs are out there?

Quote:Total number of ARs sold 2000-2014 : 5,672,919

Post: #9

For the purposes of crime reporting, Hispanics are classified under "white" which is why you don't see a Hispanic category in any of these statistics. There is no doubt whatsoever that less than half of the murders attributed to whites are actually perpetrated by whites.

Post: #10

(06-23-2016 01:31 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  For the purposes of crime reporting, Hispanics are classified under "white" which is why you don't see a Hispanic category in any of these statistics. There is no doubt whatsoever that less than half of the murders attributed to whites are actually perpetrated by whites.

You must have missed that whole Zimmerman thing.

When a Hispanic guy kills someone they become "white Hispanic".

Post: #11

fuckers. Paul Ryan gave in to the protest and now they are getting the vote they wanted on Gun Control. The vote will fail, but now precendent has been set. Paul Ryan will negotiate with terrorists and the Dem's will pull more chimpanzee antics the next time they don't get their way. He fucked up.

He should have brought the hammer down on them and censured every last one of the floor sitters. You don't buy your kids candy when they throw tantrums, any good parent knows that.

Post: #12

I always bring it, and every other issue, back to Federal vs States. I'm fine if states want to only let the criminals have the guns and not let law abiding citizens have them.

I just don't feel like people in NY or CA should be telling Alaska what to do. Or North Dakota. Or Texas. Or somebody in remote northern Minnesota. It's bull shit to be so egotistical.

In all sincerity, and excuse my ignorance...I don't really know how the gun control is legislated, given its direct contradiction to the constitution. It seems like they'd have to repeal the 2nd amendment to legislate any control on firearms. Again, excuse my ignorance on the matter.

Post: #13

So if "they" ban all guns and gun confiscation is attempted......

Post: #14

Quote:He should have brought the hammer down on them and censured every last one of the floor sitters.

Pathetic. He should have had them arrested. I bet there's probably a technical law where occupying a Federal facility also gets you on a "watch list".

Post: #15

Holy shit.

That's my impressed exclamation because you couldn't have seen a real discussion on where the gun crimes actually happen by any kind of mainstream media for the entire 30 odd years that I've been living. This is huge.

The Trump Effect™ is bringing the Realtalk™ out into reality.

Huge.

Post: #16

Sit in is over after 25 hours...

25 HOURS

Post: #17

We all know this is another Democrat tantrum for attention, but honestly The Republicans played this all wrong as they usually do. They should have just kept hearing the bills and voting them down all day, everyday, like they've done in the Senate. Don't make a big spectacle of it, just keep voting no. "OK you want us to hear your 5th gun bill today, Sure....aaand DENIED!"

But by refusing to hear this bill and vote on it, they just gave the Dems some "ammo" of their own to craft another bullshit narrative about Republicans being against gun control. All the Repubs have done is give the Dems the chance to use their favorite tactic, playing the victim card!

Once again the Republicans are one step behind playing the politics game, or they are just too stupid to realize they still have the majority, and all they have to do is do their jobs and vote down these BS bills consistently. Paul Ryan is a fucking idiot, Let them bring up 100 gun control bills and keep voting them down, end of story. But don't give them a chance to martyr themselves, they live for this kind of shit.

Post: #18

(06-23-2016 03:09 PM)George is King Wrote:  Sit in is over after 25 hours...

25 HOURS

Hey, they can't lose any of their Vacation time. I'm sure when they're on the clock, they'll be back suffering and sitting on the floor.

Post: #19

Like kids who don't get what they want and a cuck Ryan giving in.

Fuck them all.

Post: #20

Post: #21

They were being protected by an army of bodyguards armed with assault rifles while they threw their tantrum. Hypocrites.

Post: #22

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=25249

Some sit in, gotta love having catered food.

Post: #23

(06-23-2016 03:27 PM)DamienCasanova Wrote:  We all know this is another Democrat tantrum for attention, but honestly The Republicans played this all wrong as they usually do. They should have just kept hearing the bills and voting them down all day, everyday, like they've done in the Senate. Don't make a big spectacle of it, just keep voting no. "OK you want us to hear your 5th gun bill today, Sure....aaand DENIED!"

But by refusing to hear this bill and vote on it, they just gave the Dems some "ammo" of their own to craft another bullshit narrative about Republicans being against gun control. All the Repubs have done is give the Dems the chance to use their favorite tactic, playing the victim card!

Once again the Republicans are one step behind playing the politics game, or they are just too stupid to realize they still have the majority, and all they have to do is do their jobs and vote down these BS bills consistently. Paul Ryan is a fucking idiot, Let them bring up 100 gun control bills and keep voting them down, end of story. But don't give them a chance to martyr themselves, they live for this kind of shit.

No the Republicans actually did attempt to pass 2 moderate gun control bills in reponse to this. The media of course blacked this part of the story out.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/se...ill-224721

Quote:In the first of two hastily-called votes Thursday afternoon, the Collins plan won 52 votes in support, with 46 senators voting against it. It would allow the Justice Department to block people on two key federal terror lists from purchasing firearms, with a chance to appeal the denial of a gun sale if someone was wrongly included on one of the lists.

The other measure, spearheaded by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), was designed to be more appealing to Republicans by allowing federal officials to merely delay the purchase of a firearm, instead of denying it outright. It picked up just 31 votes in favor of it, with 67 senators opposed — all Democrats, a handful of moderate GOP senators and a swath of conservative Republicans.

Every Democrat rejected gun control measures proposed by Republicans. Why? Because this is all for show. They know nothing will pass so they want to make a spectacle out of it for votes, that's all that matters to them at the end of the day. There's no other rational reason they would reject a gun control bill. They want the credit if a gun control bill did pass and because they know the media won't report on the fact that Republicans attempted to pass 2 bills which failed which would destroy the narrative they're pushing that you accepted that they don't ever attempt to pass any gun control bills.

Post: #24

Here's how the George Zimmerman would work in the media.

If Ted Nugent or Clint Eastwood shot Zimmerman, it would be: "Racist white man kills Hispanic man."

When Zimmerman killed Martin, it was: "Racist white man kills young Black man."

Hispanics are "white" when dealing with more "oppressed" groups. They are not "white" when "privileged" whites are dealing with them.

Post: #25

If these jackals are serious about gun control, here is what they should do. They should get off their lazy fat asses and go out there right now. They should approach law-abiding gun owners and try to disarm them. See how that works.