Why wait?

We'll forward your mail.
You won't be missed.

C'mon man..I'm all for leaving if you're getting trashed in taxes etc..but not the country. I'm most certainly not left of center but could live with the Clinton years vice the last 4 yrs.

Your type may not be welcome in Canada.....try Moldavia

"The NRA responded to the call for a statement. They did so in a respectful and considerate manner." - by calling for MORE guns, in schools no less.

The NRA jumped the shark tank, but not before donning a flaming clown suit.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Armed society is a polite society.

And to go with that theme, to secure peace is to prepare for war.

Joe-Are you planning on attending the firefighters funerals in New York this weekend? Maybe you could show up carrying one of your assault weapons, where you could proudly display it to the victim's family members.

"Armed society is a polite society. "

Is that a direct correlation? Are they dependent, one apon the other?
Ten most polite cities, as rated by Aneki

1 New York
2 Zurich
3 Toronto
4 Berlin
5 Sao Paulo
6 Zagreb
7 Auckland
8 Warsaw
9 Mexico City
10 Stockholm

It would be a stretch to correlate the armed status of a given populace with their
public exchanges, particularly with strangers.

On the other hand, the ten most dangerous cities as rated by Aneki;

1 Baghdad Iraq
2 Swat valley Pakistan
3 Kabul Afghanistan
4 Mogadishu Somalia
5 Washington DC United States
6 Rio de Janeiro Brazil
7 Caracas Venezuela
8 Medellin Colombia
9 Guatemala City Guatemala
10 Johannseburg South Africa

Plenty of armed citizens, in those places. Not a great deal of correlation, there.

Perhaps what you meant to say was, "People are polite when they think their neighbors are locked and loaded." ?

That sounds just peachy.

I thought it was a response that was all about them (the NRA) and not about the recurrent massacres that are seemingly more prevalent these days....all facilitated by easy access to weapons that kill easily and with situational frequency.....the NRA does not have a soul....only a mandate from the gun makers to defy any form of regulation...even re-instating the assault bill that made sense. I found them (the NRA) to be politely arrogant and condescendingly poetic in their response. What more can we expect from those who see themselves perched on unassailable pedestals....above all the stench that they are participant in the creation of.

Joe the media was denouncing not announcing the NRA's s silence on the SHES massacre.

@RU..
did you know that is a half quote from a science fiction writer? or are repeating that half quote from something you've "seen" here is the whole quote plus more
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
..and of course the less famous .........
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
― Robert A. Heinlein

"...did you know that is a half quote from a science fiction writer?"

- Leave RI

I suppose some are still shocked to find out "Starship Troopers" wasn't a documentary. That title is a catch phrase with my spouse for,
"Where are the keys?"

Jeezit, that IS funny.

...whaddaya mean it wasn't a documentary???...are you saying....nahhh...I'm not one to check on your source NL, however, I will have to confer with my friends Santa, Tooth Fairy and smart blonde...at least they exist....

The law doesn’t stop crime.
That’s not the law’s primary function.

The primary function of the law is to provide society with legal recourse in the face of antisocial behavior, i.e. behavior that infringes on the rights and property of others or upon the security of the society and its people.

If you don’t have a law that makes a school a gun free zone, then when a kid brings a gun to school with the (maybe) intention of threatening his classmates, even if you catch him before he can use it, law enforcement’s options are limited.

The school can (maybe) kick him out for violating a school policy, but the law can’t touch him, not really, unless he violated some local gun ordinance or specifically transmitted a threat. And so he goes home, gets the rest of his mommy’s guns and comes back. But if you have a gun free zone, then by law the cops can arrest him the first time and have him evaluated for potential violence and maybe save your kid’s life.

Implemented correctly, laws gradually change our culture and society and make certain behaviors less likely.

Laws proscribing discrimination are an example. So are laws regarding drinking and driving. Before there were severe penalties for drinking and driving, the penalties could not address the real problem, and curtail the risk.

Laws provide recourse to the public.

FYI - What the NRA proposed - it's another law.

How many 'accidents' would not happen....if you had more restrictive laws relative to assault weapons? That is something you cannot answer.

Debunked:

Number of Murders, United States, 2009: 15,241
Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2009: 9,146 (60%)

Number of Murders, Britain, 2008*: 648
(Since Britain’s population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,240 US murders)
Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2008* 39 (SIX PERCENT)
(equivalent to 195 US murders)

Six percent is less than 60%, right?
39 is less than 9146, right?

Math is hard.

Debunked, part deux:

Number of mass shootings in the UK since Dunblane?
Number of mass shootings in Australia since Port Arthur?

When did we decide to become a third-world, tin pot shooting gallery.
We can do better.

Careful, start insisting on facts and you'll be accused of being me.

(And I'm MUCH better looking.)

This is lifted, directly from The American Thinker.

As such, it violates the TOS.
Mods, please remove this post.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/listening_to_the_latest_media.html

Nice try NL to stop the truth. However if you had read the post by the MOD, she deleted the other one because it was a full blog post and this is and article with excerps not a blog post and has the links to the full article. Not a violation of TOS that I see. But then again I will let the mod decide as I was not aware you are one now. That would be citation links that you call for so offten lol.

Also if linking to an article is a violation then you would not be allowed to link to anything like NYtimes channel 12 etc. You would be out of business with all your links to pundit sites lol. Start the name calling you love so much now lol.

From the TOS -

promotes illegal or unauthorized copying of another person's copyrighted work or links to them or providing information to circumvent security measures;

"if you had read the post by the MOD, she deleted the other one because it was a full blog post and this is and article with excerps not a blog post and has the links to the full article."

Actually, no.

My reprint was less than 1500 characters.
Yours, as so often is the case, takes more than one entry to be complete.

It's totally bogus, attempting to turn a local discussion into yet another conservative conspiracy aggregator. That, and yer Ma dresses you funny.

Fair is fair, Jack - do your own heavy lifting.

Since you are not a MOD NL I think I will let the MOD decide after all they run this blog not you. Stay on topic will you.

no regr allia b and everyone:
Please refrain from cutting and pasting other sources. It's misleading. You are welcome to refer to a particular aspect of a blog post (or several) and include a link. Lead with the attribution, always, as in "according to ..."
Thanks.

"Stay on topic will you."

- no regr allia b

You first, Jack. Yet another tangent, as the OP pointedly direct his remarks
toward the NRA press conference, not changes in US gun law.

You won't get another pass to layout reprints as an opinion piece.
Using facts for refutation and support is reasonable.

Using a conspiracy blog as a smokescreen is bush-league.
Pull on your big boy pants, Jack

Thats exactly what I did Elizabeth.

It also is not from the blog section of that site it is an article written by a contributer to it Elizabeth with no copywrite on it as they rarely do on that sites articles. Point was the links needed to be explained a little to what they lead too. I guess I can write my own but it would still be the same words the article used which are from thoses links.

No different then quotes from NY times in my opinion. Though I did forget the quotes, sorry ;-}

Right - your contribution to Part 2 below was:

Part 2

(quoted text directly from Blog)

All is not what you are hearing put out by the Anti-gun crowd at all. In fact it is downright lies for the most part or spin to further their agenda.

I call shenanigans. This is a steaming load of male bovine excreta on a ladle.

I do find it strange how NL can do personal attacks on everyone and make up rules that NL dictates we must follow and yet nothing happens to that poster. Has been on going for months with many complaints from other posters about NL's anticsPersonally I do not respond to NL when NL starts the namecalling personal attacks as I was told to do by a few editors.

Problem is they are allowed for some reason that baffles me and many others. Oh well thats life I guess.

The sum total of your "contribution to the discussion" amount to:

Hey Guys! Check this out!

"There is a lot of cherry picking here it seems. Let’s look at the numbers from the people who actually keep track of these things. This person quotes and links to facts not speculations, or cherry picking pundits. Just posting excepts but the whole article should be read for those who do not believe it so they may follow the links to the facts."

Considering that these figures have been debunked, repeatedly in other articles directed to this particular topic - you're off the rails - again.

Everything else is cut-n-paste. You and Joe Sousa are spammers, Jack.

Question Elizabeth, I was told by editors to use citation's when stating things as facts and not opinion. Just how do I do that different than what I posted seriously.

no regr allia b,
Curating is a tricky (and time-consuming!) business, but important. That said, editors may bring different sensibilities to the task. In the above comment, you cut and pasted from the American Thinker. I don't love that, but will tolerate it if you reference any citation first. As I wrote before, "according to XxxxxXxxxx.com ... " works well. Does that make sense?

This article merely lays out the facts with the links to the actual numbers from agencies who keep track without bias on those agencies parts. It should be notes that the UN who wants gun control in the US has numbers that directly conflict with their agenda of anti-gun resolutions nd treaties they want to enforce on the US. Evidently they do not believe their own studies results.

Frankly, spin exists on both sides, but trying to convince the closed-minded Ideologues on this site is a waste of time. Cherry-picking is one of their favorite logical fallicies, as is the ad hominem. Note Mike's logical fallicies above: 1) the strawman argument: he dismisses an opinion piece designed to promote thought because it is isn't a scientific study and 2) the ad hominem at the end. Frankly, I don't think they teach critical thinking in school anymore.

If the shoe fits......any facetious comments directed towards WSJ....were meant to be. Your links implied that the correlation between reduced gun supply and actual mass murders...well they seemed to do that. The following links and stats implied that those you chose were to color the cake. It is all opinion here. I disagreed with your implications

This is lifted, directly from The American Thinker

That is a conservative blog, and rare contributor of actual thought.
As such, it violates the TOS.

Mods, please remove this post.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/listening_to_the_latest_media.html

Naome
Thanks for the link. You're correct the TOS is violated. I never authorized the picture of me sitting in the yard thinking of a joke.

oh boy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE0pwJ5PMDg

LOL very funny Leave RI lol

"To all these numbers thrown out there from other Countries it is not comparable because of ownership and population."

Right, we're different - we've got guns.

"They are the organization with access to the actual numbers as law enforcement is required to send all incidents involving a weapon, whether a bat, knife gun etc to them." Okay - do the heavy lifting. How many homicides committed in the US with anything that's NOT a gun?

"All of Euorope has to be included as 1 to equal the US population. Not to mention there are many cultural differences to take into account."

That almost sounds like science. It's NOT science, but it sounds like it.

Would it surprise you to find out that of the 23 wealthiest countries in the World,
you know places people actually want to live, 80% of all gun deaths were
in America?

Further, 87% of all children killed by guns in these same countries were American? Isn't it nice to know we can still lead the developed World at something?

"That is the simple answer in my opinion and why banss are nothing more futile attempt to make people feel they accomplished something when they accomplished nothing." Except where they do, as in Australia and the UK.

If you could be bothered to read any other post on these pages, you would see that this is ground we've covered, ad nauseum.

For every problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
- H.L. Menken

To end gun violence, you need (you guessed it) fewer guns

Did you actually read this article?

"In March 2009, authorities seized more than 40 pieces of evidence - including gallons of hydrochloric acid and drain cleaner, glass jars and funnels - and 10 guns from Muntz's Nanticoke home, according to Times-Shamrock archives.

Muntz was charged with delivery of methamphetamine, manufacturing methamphetamine and criminal use of a communication facility in connection with the probe into the Ashley-based Outlaws Motorcycle Club, the local affiliate of a dangerous nationwide biker gang."

http://standardspeaker.com/news/home-invasion-intruder-killed-1.1102011

This "home invasion" took place in a meth lab.

That's your best example?

Meth lab in a trailer.

Next....
http://www.timesleader.com/stories/Person-of-interest-from-Hunlock-Twp-home-invasion-questioned-by-police,98785

Meth Lab in a trailer park.

* Surprise *
http://citizensvoice.com/news/nine-face-charges-in-hunlock-township-meth-probe-1.1151317

The fact that you lack the rudimentary curiosity to research what I found in less than 2 minutes illustrates the problem; you're willing to accept at face value
when they come off some wing-nut Conspiracy page aggregator and can't
be bothered to consider the source or their motives?

That's confirmation bias, not independent thought.

You have a point, here - somewhere?

Ok I'm bringing in the subject matter expert...you all failed to research and find him..he was in plain sight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WuOFwFbuJg

I think anyone adamant the 2nd Amendment remain "as it was written in stone"
fails at dictionary use. I would hazard a guess that they can't name any Founding Fathers that didn't make it onto our currency.

"Lessee... there was Button Gwinnett, Jimmy Buffet, Sam Adams who got invited to everything - he brought the beer...um... Dasher? Dancer? Prancer and Nixon?"

"U-S-A! U-S-A!!"

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr01/2012/11/15/11/enhanced-buzz-1156-1352995860-1.jpg