What Has America become ?

[567chevys]

What Has America become ???

[chevynut]

We are now the most divided country than I've seen in my entire life. Obama promised to bring the country together, and to be the most transparent president in history. Instead, he has further divided us, and he's been the most deceitful president this country has ever had. He covered up "fast and furious" documents through executive privilege to protect Holder and others, he's tried to cover up the government's failures in Benghazi, and he's shielded many in his administration by refusing to disclose information. We are a country that's divided nearly down the middle on many social and economic issues, and he has done nothing to address that. He thinks he "won" by creating class warfare and class envy. The nation has lost.

[NCW]

http://tpnn.com/bidens-gun-control-t...rce-is-a-joke/

[markm]

I am really glad that I am on the downside would not want to be a kid today.

[Owain T]

Hi Gents! Here is an infographic I put together for uni this last Autumn. It really speaks to Labour's influence here versus your liberal parties.

[chevynut]

Owain, nice graphic. It again proves that disarming the public doesn't lead to less crime. The idiots on this sid of the pond want to do the same thing, and expect a different result. That's the definition of insanity.

They think they can ban "assault weapons" and stop the killings like what happened in Connecticut recently. Well, the Columbine shootings happened smack in the middle of the last "assault weapon" ban. They keep talking about "automatic weapons" when referring to the so-called "assault weapons", in an attempt to con the public. Most people know that it's very hard to get a permit for an "automatic" weapon, and that "assault rifles" are semi-automatic, just like many hunting rifles. In fact, the majority of owners of "assault rifles" use them for varmint hunting, competition shooting, and target practice. An "assault weapon" ban will do absolutely nothing to prevent another Columbine or other school shooting. If they want to kill kids, they will use bombs or something else.

[NCW]

Owain, nice graphic. It again proves that disarming the public doesn't lead to less crime. The idiots on this sid of the pond want to do the same thing, and expect a different result. That's the definition of insanity.

They think they can ban "assault weapons" and stop the killings like what happened in Connecticut recently. Well, the Columbine shootings happened smack in the middle of the last "assault weapon" ban. They keep talking about "automatic weapons" when referring to the so-called "assault weapons", in an attempt to con the public. Most people know that it's very hard to get a permit for an "automatic" weapon, and that "assault rifles" are semi-automatic, just like many hunting rifles. In fact, the majority of owners of "assault rifles" use them for varmint hunting, competition shooting, and target practice. An "assault weapon" ban will do absolutely nothing to prevent another Columbine or other school shooting. If they want to kill kids, they will use bombs or something else.

As a reminder with regards to the last tragedy, according to records, the .223 caliber weapon was in the trunk of the car, not on his person. You don't need a semi auto rifle when no one else has a defense.

[chevynut]

Nick, that's not true. They found a shotgun in the car. All wounds were inflicted with the .223 per the autopsies. What you stated was a rumor, but it has been proven wrong. Still, an "assault weapon" ban would not have prevented this.

[Rick_L]

Obviously still lots of confusion as to the facts in the Connecticut shooting, because the reporting was so inaccurate on the first and second day.

The handguns he had were semi-automatic, as are most.

We've already proven that an "assault rifle" ban does nothing.

I don't know the whole answer for preventing this kind of tragedy, banning weapons is not one. The mental health issue is something we could do better at.

[markm]

It is interesting to me that most on this side tend to be conservative in their politics, while the sites with censorship tend to lean the other way.