State of the Union


PDA






InkEd
February 12, 2013, 11:43 AM
The State of the Union address is scheduled for tonight. Gun control is one of the top things on the agenda. Because as we all know everything else is goign so great in the country right now..... :banghead:

Obama is expected to do the "emotion over logic" tactic (again) of having people who were assault with a deadly weapon victims all around him like he did with the kids when signing the executive orders.

It will be more of the same old talking about all the deaths and injuries caused by firearms and how these INANIMATE objects are the problem and must be banned. :rolleyes:

Reports say that he will BRIEFLY discuss jobs and (his unpopular) healthcare plan during the address too.
__________________________________________________

On a personal note: I am getting fed up with the huge focus and USE OF RESOURCES by the Obama adminstration. All of these commitees and actions they keep pushing WASTE money, time and manpower that could be used to help solve some of the other problems we have in this country.

IMHO the issue of gun control should be a matter of states' rights. The only thing the federal government should be doing about it is making sure that state and local laws do not infringe upon the people's rights granted by the Constitution.

If you enjoyed reading about "State of the Union" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Akita1
February 12, 2013, 11:46 AM
He's parading out the mother of that 15-year old girl who sang at the Inauguration and was killed a few days later by gang banger shooting into her crowd of friends. Nice how they continue to use tragedy for political gain.

Screamin'Eagle
February 12, 2013, 11:50 AM
Paralyzed Rep. to Make Victims Visible (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/langevin-showcase-gun-victims-state-union-131322344--abc-news-politics.html;_ylt=AwrHga3hYRpRf08AqwCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNsM2NqYW1yBG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBGUARwa2cDMDZjNmNlNGYtZGFlZi0zZGY0LWIzZmUtNGFjYzBhY2RlMDg5BHBvcwMzBHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyA2EyYjM1ZTQyLTc1MjUtMTFlMi04YjVlLTNhN2QwNmE3ZGQ5Zg--;_ylg=X3oDMTFpNzk0NjhtBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3)

While Langevin concedes that the new gun measures under consideration in Congress wouldn't have prevented his accident, he wants to ensure that all guns are kept out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, especially criminals and the mentally ill.

"Even though what should have been the safest [of] environments, in my situation being in a police station with trained police officers, my accident happened at the hands of two weapons experts on the police SWAT team," he said. "If an accident can happen there, an accident can happen anywhere."

I sure hope the patriots give their seats to citizens who chose not to be victims and used a gun to protect themselves from criminals.

packpike
February 13, 2013, 09:28 AM
I have been sending emails, but I'm going to mail the below letter to My senators today. Feel free to edit it for your own states.


Senator _____, Feb 13th, 2013

As I watched the President’s State of the Union address last night I was encouraged by his vision for America in many areas including education, deficit reduction, simplifying the tax code, US job growth and others. There were no direct proposals on most of the subjects in the President’s speech, so I will leave it in your capable hands to determine if the proposals behind these ideas are acceptable (and can be paid for) or not.

The President did however submit a specific proposal on one subject, gun control. He suggested that we should all support a Universal Background Check (UBC) system. As my heart ached for the families of the victims that were presented I realized that none of them would have been saved if the President’s UBC was in place. In fact, according to my quick review none of the latest incidents that have been broadly televised in recent memory would have been thwarted had the UBC been in place. That led to me asking myself, ‘Why would the President propose the UBC if it is not a solution to the problem that he himself was highlighting?’ I concluded that it’s being proposed simply as a ‘feel-good’ measure to make it appear that ‘something’ has been done. While I would love to see new laws/systems that would actually stop crime/murder we don’t have time to waste on ‘feel-good’ ideas. I am also concerned that for a UBC to be useable a federal firearms registration list will be required. I believe that this would be unconstitutional and could have negative implications in the future.

I am writing to ask that you stand against any new proposals that contradict the 2nd Amendment by infringing the right to keep and bear arms or create new unnecessary (UBC), unfounded (high cap magazine ban), or proven useless (AWB) bureaucracy for law-abiding citizens. If background checks are the answer then why do we prosecute a small fraction of the criminals trying to buy guns through the current system today? Also, does anyone really believe that new laws will stop criminals who by the definition ignore existing laws? I am sure that this will be a heated debate and the President and Vice President will use our sympathy and empathy for the victims of gun violence to gain support for their proposals and to demonize anyone that stands against them. Please do not be pressured into giving into emotional, uneducated measures and opinions. Please stand strong and represent the true opinions of your constituents. I feel certain that the majority of Americans are against murder, but the majority of Americans do not support what is being proposed even though it continues to be repeated by the current Administration that we do.


A concerned citizen,

Sock Puppet
February 13, 2013, 09:58 AM
Well done, Greenejason.

Ryanxia
February 13, 2013, 10:00 AM
Good letter Greenejason.

Cesiumsponge
February 14, 2013, 12:01 AM
I am not sure why he name dropped someone who was killed in Chicago by criminals doing illegal things, where guns are illegal.

The letter is well written, but I don't know if aides read letters that are more than a paragraph long. They sift through hundreds of these a day. A lot of the "email blasts" held by Ruger or the NRA consist of fairly short, concise letters that state the intent in a paragraph and remind the recipient that they're a voting constituency.

packpike
February 14, 2013, 10:13 AM
My emails have all been short and sweet, but I thought that if I'm going to mail one in it should be worth it. To me it would seem odd to open a letter and it just be a few sentences. To each his own.

Jason

somerandomguy
February 14, 2013, 12:52 PM
I threw up a little when Gabby went up. I hate to sound cold and heartless, but I'm going to tell it like it is: I think most victims of a gun related tragedy are too emotional to have a rational opinion on guns. I'm tired of victims being used for politics, it's not healthy for the country nor is it fair.

481
February 14, 2013, 04:42 PM
I threw up a little when Gabby went up. I hate to sound cold and heartless, but I'm going to tell it like it is: I think most victims of a gun related tragedy are too emotional to have a rational opinion on guns. I'm tired of victims being used for politics, it's not healthy for the country nor is it fair.

It's what the Left does. Dear Leader has shown that he has no problem exploiting the suffering/loss of others to go after any part of the Constitution that he doesn't like or those who enjoy the benefits of those rights so enumerated.

Given the lack of definition/description for his attack on law-abiding gun owners, I suspect that deep-down he realizes his beloved AWB is dead in the water- still he'll throw a few long passes in hopes of getting something. That's the beauty of incrementalism- even a little gain goes in the "win column" and he can always try for something more at some later point.

If you enjoyed reading about "State of the Union" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!