What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Or, "Responsible gun owner properly identifies target, and subdues him without drawing his weapon."

There you go screwing up a good conjectural possibility with the actual facts of the case. Get off the internet.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

If she hadn't put a "scope" over Gifford's district we wouldn't be having this conversation.

And is it too much to ask of a Presidential candidate to use responsible langauge and imagery?

Certainly. Why don't you fire off an e-mail to John Kerry, who kidded about shooting Bush on Bill Maher's show? Oh yeah, that's "different."
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Yeah, it's absolute. Just like the first amendment.

Oh wait.

Why don't "gun control" advocates just come out for confiscation. That's what most of 'em secretly lust for, IMO.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

The assault weapons ban that expired under Bush would have helped prevent some carnage in this particular case.

No chance he could have brought 2 Glocks. You guys live in a fantasy world. What color is the sky?

Ah ha, see, it's BUSH's fault. Nicely done.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Why don't "gun control" advocates just come out for confiscation. That's what most of 'em secretly lust for, IMO.

LOL. Nice mind-reading act you have there.

But yeah, the right doesn't rely on a persecution complex to get out of tight corners. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Certainly. Why don't you fire off an e-mail to John Kerry, who kidded about shooting Bush on Bill Maher's show? Oh yeah, that's "different."

Except for the part where nobody said it was.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Certainly. Why don't you fire off an e-mail to John Kerry, who kidded about shooting Bush on Bill Maher's show? Oh yeah, that's "different."

Link? I'm honestly not familiar with that quote. But if he did it he should be condemned also.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

No chance he could have brought 2 Glocks. You guys live in a fantasy world. What color is the sky?

Ah ha, see, it's BUSH's fault. Nicely done.

No, it's not Bush's fault. He actually supported the ban. The ban was passed by the Senate but the House failed to take it up. Sure, two glocks would have been 20 bullets, his magazine from what I read had 30. Do I hear 3?
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

He could have used his foot to fire the third one. Don't you know anything?
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Link? I'm honestly not familiar with that quote. But if he did it he should be condemned also.

It's been circulating around the Echo Chamber. It's a great dodge.

"Last night when you were drunk you took a dump on my lawn. You should apologize."
"Three years ago your son dented my car backing out of your driveway."
"I... wait... what?"

If we have dented their cars, we should apologize -- pull up the examples and we will. Kerry said that? That's a stupid, thoughtless, and awful thing for him to say and we disown that sort of rhetoric. John Kerry: you suck.

The right's been taking dumps on America's lawn for 20 years. They will never apologize. It is not in their DNA to admit anything. Even here, where absolutely nothing anyone says will ever make any difference, they will never back down. That would "show weakness" or something. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Found: an honest liberal!
Lord Help Me, I'm Defending Palin
Okay, it's a little over the top for Sarah Palin to accuse her critics of "blood libel." But she does have a basic point. She had nothing to do with Jared Loughner. He was not an extremist who embraced some radical version of her ideas. And her use of targets to identify districts Republicans were, um, targetting is not exceptional or prone to incite anybody.

What's happening is that Palin has come to represent unhinged grassroots conservatism, and people in the media immediately (and incorrectly) associated Loughner with the far right. Moreover, the Republican establishment understands her potential candidacy as a liability and is looking to snuff it out. So you have this weird moment where Palin is on trial for something she has no connection with at all.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

The assault weapons ban that expired under Bush would have helped prevent some carnage in this particular case.

It would have? How? Either way, didn't President Obama reinstate such a ban, or are we thinking of two different things?

Edit: Upon review, I can't find anything on the internet about Obama and a ban. Guess I was confused.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Excellent response to Palin's missive from Congresswoman Gifford's cousin:

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/01/11/dear-sarah-palincousin-cong-giffords-speaks

As I am sure you are now aware, Congresswoman Giffords herself had expressed concern about your map in particular. She said: “We need to realize that the rhetoric, and the firing people up and ... for example, we're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but the thing is, the way she has it depicted, we're in the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they've got to realize that there are consequences to that action...”

Your response so far, has been to defend the images and language you use. In an e-mail to Mr. Glenn Beck you said, “Our children will not have peace if politicos just capitalize on this to succeed in portraying anyone as inciting terror and violence.”

Ms. Palin, the moment calls for more than this. I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment and of your right to defend your words and to challenge those who seek to connect them to the assassination attempt and murders in Tucson, Arizona. I also know that there is often a very long distance between words and actions.

But even if your map and your language had nothing to do with these murders or any others that might occur in the future, a compassionate response would acknowledge that possibility and indicate a willingness, in her honor, in honor of the people who died, to consider this concern.

Of all of ridiculous notions to have emereged from this rush to politicize and trivialize what happend, this infanalizing of Ms. Giffords is right at the top of the list. She was an incumbent congressman, facing the fight of her political life, to stay in office during a year when more than 60 of her colleagues were voted out of office.

She was not Joan of Arc, fighting a lonely battle against overwhelming odds. She had advisors, handlers, DNCC money and message and media advice, pollsters and the whole panoply of resources all congressional candidates can call on to maximize their chances of winning. This is our system. This is a tough, smart, gun owning, gun shooting lady. And to beg the question that her worries about Sarah Palin's map (to MSNBC) was anything other than a carefully crafted strategy sets some sort of record for naivte.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

It would have? How? Either way, didn't President Obama reinstate such a ban, or are we thinking of two different things?

I posted it below. When the shooter tried to reload his weapon with another clip he was stopped by people in the crowd.

His clip had 30 bullets. Under the ban you could not have a clip with more than 10.

This is how I understand it based on what I've read. I could have some exact details wrong but that is what I have read.

So, under the old ban if he had only the one gun like he did and he had only gotten off one clip like he did that's 20 less bullets that would have been fired. So, by saying "it could have" helped prevent some carnage is a fair assessment IMO.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Hmm. Fair enough. National Review though, for whatever worth you ascribe to it, seems to disagree.

The weapon in question, a 9mm Glock 19 pistol, was not banned; neither were the 31-round magazines the shooter used. What was banned was the manufacture or importation of new magazines with a capacity of more than ten rounds.

So, then the question is, if new magazines were banned, how hard would it have been to get his hands on an old one? The answer seems to be not hard.

That is not hair-splitting, inasmuch as high-capacity magazines for Glocks were and are commonplace — almost as commonplace as Glocks themselves — and remained so even while their manufacture and importation were banned. Most Glock 9mm magazines are usable in any Glock 9mm pistol, regardless of model. Glock makes at least four different 9mm pistols at the moment — 9mm being one of the most common calibers — and a high-capacity magazine sold for almost any of those could have been used in the Glock 19. Third-party manufacturers make them as well, and have made them for years and years, meaning that AWB or no AWB, finding one is not very difficult. The only difference the AWB is likely to have made is that the shooter would have had a used magazine instead of a new one (assuming he did in fact have a new one), and he probably would have paid five bucks more for it.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

Hmm. Fair enough. National Review though, for whatever worth you ascribe to it, seems to disagree.



So, then the question is, if new magazines were banned, how hard would it have been to get his hands on an old one? The answer seems to be not hard.

Aaah, well, thanks. That is information I did not have. Kind of makes the ban pointless then. Seems some one in the gun lobby did a good job there by neutering the law that was passed at one time.

I'm not surprised. Good find.
 
Re: Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords Apparantly Survives Assassination Attempt

She was not Joan of Arc, fighting a lonely battle against overwhelming odds. She had advisors, handlers, DNCC money and message and media advice, pollsters and the whole panoply of resources all congressional candidates can call on to maximize their chances of winning. This is our system. This is a tough, smart, gun owning, gun shooting lady. And to beg the question that her worries about Sarah Palin's map (to MSNBC) was anything other than a carefully crafted strategy sets some sort of record for naivte.

Your last sentence is silly (more mind-reading from you), but the rest of the paragraph is exactly right, and most of us agree with it. The worst thing people can do here is give people permission to turn their brains off on this issue by giving them any easy out to dismiss everything as a political tactic. Holding up Giffords as a babe in the woods gives them that easy out.

Anybody who uses this sort of rhetoric is wrong for doing so, be they left, right, or Silly Party. Anybody who seeks to excuse this sort of rhetoric by hiding behind claims that all calls to be careful in rhetoric are politically-motivated is likewise wrong.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top