Its not just the left.....

[westerly1965]

Not to play devils advocate here but I felt it was important to point out that its not only the left that is lobbying for different types of gun control.  I am not by any means implying that this represents the thinking of the whole of that party I am just pointing out the facts.

   

   http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/king-proposes-gun-control-at-public-events-1.2640149">http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/king-proposes-gun-control-at-public-events-1.2640149

[redhawk4]

Sounds like a case of self interest to me, rather than general gun control.  

   

   It's still the old chestnut of how will the 1000ft perimeter be enforced, so again only law abiding folks will be affected and feel they need to comply. The mentally unhinged planning mayhem will largely be unaffected unless it's in a building with security at the access points, which most likely would already occur.  

   

   Obviously any professional hitmen will be unaffected as a 1000 yard plus shot would be well within the possibilities.

   

   I know people often mean well with some of these proposals, I wish they would just think things through before opening their mouths, we always get a lot of knee jerk reactions after a shooting takes place.

[lohman446]

Wait, so federal elected officials are due better protection than the rest of us via infringing on the rights for the rest of us?  Sorry King, I am not travelling across state lines and the permit is issues by my State government.  You have no authority to propose such legislation.  

   

   It violates federal authority on a number of levels, not to mention equal protection under the law means equal protection for all of us.  You do not get better just because you are a congress person.  Of the people, for the people, and by the people means you are still part of the people, not some special ruling class.

[redhawk4]

Better Pay, Pensions, Helthcare, Expense Accounts etc. why should they not think they are entittled to better Protection?

   

   I still don't see how this proposal would have helped in the AZ case, weren't they outside a store with people moving all around. A law abiding citizen with a CWP potentially might not even know the meeting was taking place thereby walking or driving into the "forbidden zone". It just seems another way to ensure there will be no armed citizens around to assist when some "Phsyco Billy" starts shooting.

[lohman446]

Beh, we need to start recalling congressmen and women who show such a fundamental lack of knowledge of the Constitution, or worse yet simply don't care.

[coinchop]

Why not keep it simple and just make murder

   illeagle at public events?

   

   NOTICE!        MURDER FREE ZONE.

   

   WABODF s

[westerly1965]

Ohhh That's a good Idea Coin.  It will keep all the criminals away if we just make "murder free" zones.  And that will cover all weapons not just guns.  That way just because some crazy can't buy a gun he won't come in and smash your head in with a hammer either because the law says its a "murder free" zone and we know the criminals always obey the laws!

[tranquilo]

Instead of passing new laws that infringe on the freedoms of law abiding citizens, why don't the politicians take responsibility for their own security and they (and/or folks in their entourage) carry concealed and be more vigilant and aware of their surroundings?  Obvious solutions to problems don't often cross their little minds.

[pvq]

The difference between Republicans and Conservatives has never been more stark. Fact is most Republicans today are not conservative....and it seems that only the Conservatives and the Libertarians really give a hoot about the Constitution. I no longer consider myself a Republican....and Peter King (long ago) lost the mantle of conservatism in my view.

[westerly1965]

I agree Pvq there are alot of "Republicans" that are nowhere near where they should be in the spectrum of Conservatism....its actually kinda scary.

[redhawk4]

"Obvious solutions to problems don't often cross their little minds"

   

   I was agreeing with your post Tranquilo until I got this far, the words "don't often" need to be replaced with never IMO. Perhaps once in a blue moon, but don't often is being far too kind.

   

   Coinchop, the Murder Free Zone comment/joke sums it up perfectly, great irony - frighteningly truthful. A few more signs like Theft Free Zone, No Speeding Zone, No Rape Zone, No Fraud Zone etc. and we wouldn't even need a police force, think of the money we'd save. I guess some No Breaking the Law signs and we'd be good to go. We could also release all the prisoners from jail after they've read a No More Crimes Allowed Sign and close them too saving yet more money.

   

   It has endless potential, how about No Fighting signs everywhere to bring about that elusive world peace people have always dreamed of.  

   

   No more waits at airport security, signs with No Terrorists, Weapons or Bombs allowed on planes could see to all that, much more efficient than the current system.

   

   We could secure the Mexican border with double sided signs. One side would read, "No Illegal Immigration or Drug Smuggling Allowed" and on the US side "No Gun Smuggling" - Problem solved.

   

   All we need is a sign in all government buildings saying "No Reckless Spending" and we'd think we'd all died and gone to Heaven.

   

   

   Hoorah, Coinchop for President 2011, a few "Vote Coinchop" signs at polling stations and it's as good as in the bag.

   

   I probably should have asked Coinchop if he wants to be President, but it's probably OK as I haven't seen any "Coinchop doesn't want to be President" signs anywhere      

[westerly1965]

Redhawk LOL

[redhawk4]

Breaking News straigtht from CBS:  

   

   Independant Presidential candidate Coinchop says if elected in 2012 he will immediately abolish Obama's healthcare bill.  

   

   Coincop was quoted as saying "this is a ridiculous waste of money, when all we need is some "No Getting Ill or Injured" signs.

   

   He had no comment on how jobs would be found for Doctors, Nurses and others currently employed in the Healthcare field but did hint that grants might be available to convert hospitals and other medical facilities into manufacturing plants for . . . . you guessed it signs.

[umpire]

Coinchop,

   

    What does WABODF s stand for?   hehe

   

   Ah ,nevermind I think I figured it out,

   

   By the way I like your way of thinking

[shooter2]

Sign, Sign, everywhere a sign.....blocking out the scenery breaking my mind.....do this don't do that can't you read the sign.

[westerly1965]

I'll vote for him hell I'll even contribute to the fund for his election signs...

[lohman446]

This is the thing though.  The "right" has moved and left a lot of us without candidates who actually represent our views.  We get scared of "throwing our vote away" and vote for the lesser of two evils.  We had our chance last election - we basically new Obama would win.  We should have taken that chance to vote for the candidate that best suited our wants.  A "Reagan / Mondale" type election result would force the Republican party to respond back to the base.

   

   Face it, as long as we continue to vote for the Republican party because its better than the alternative (and I heavily question that at this point) we are only enabling them to be worse.  The two party system is broken right now, and yet we continue to use it.

[bud]

#

   

   Why should we vote if we don't like the candidates?

   # linda Says:

   August 20th, 2010 at 6:22 pm

   

   WE ARE IN THE POSITION WE ARE IN BECAUSE WE DO NOT ELECT WHO WILL REPRESENT US:: REMEMBER IT IS NOT ONLY YOUR VOTE ITS YOUR VOICE, ITS YOUR CITY/STATE, ITS YOUR TAX DOLLAR, YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO SPENDS THEM AND WHERE THEY ARE SPENT. MAKE A VOTE AND HAVE CONTROL DONT LET THEM CONTROL YOU.

   # Ryan Says:

   August 23rd, 2010 at 10:23 pm

   

   Some people don't vote because of their faith... Check out the Anabaptists, Mennonites, Amish, etc...

   # Paul Tempesta Says:

   August 25th, 2010 at 5:08 pm

   

   I've always voted, but I intend to not vote in the future. The caliber of the candidates with all the negative advertising shows me that no one running should be elected. I have become really disappointed with the behavior and the ethics of those running and even more so with those that actually get elected. More than once I have voted in an empty spot and entered "None of the above". So, why should I waste my time to help someone get elected when I will be ashamed of his behavior or performance once he is in. Yes, I'm a disgruntled voter, make that ex voter. Show me somebody with a solid background of ethical and positive behavior and I will vote. Otherwise, I'll stay home and and watch TV to see what lousy bastard actually takes office.

   

   Paul Tempesta

   # Erik Says:

   September 20th, 2010 at 3:24 am

   

   because it doesn't matter if you like them or not. whichever one represents you and your needs better is the one you vote for

   # Laura Says:

   October 18th, 2010 at 7:43 pm

   

   Maybe you know that NONE of the candidates REALLY represent ANY of your interests? EXAMPLE: Obama vs. McCain, I didn't like either of their policies. I can honestly say that I didn't want either one of them in office, or Hilary Clinton. Isn't that sad? That's why people are sick of voting.

   # Tyler Says:

   October 27th, 2010 at 10:30 pm

   

   If people are sick of voting then you're insinuating that they would rather live in a country with no choices. I doubt many Americans want to live in a communist country. Not voting is a choice yes, but it means that your voice will not count. Also since one of the candidates will win then at least choose the one that's less painful to vote for. Just cause you don't vote doesn't mean it will prevent them from gaining office.

   # Remy Says:

   October 28th, 2010 at 12:38 pm

   

   It doesn't really matter if you dislike a candidate. Even if you think none of them should be elected, one of them WILL be elected. All you really need to do is look at their site once, and decide if what they stand for is closer to how you'd like America to go. Even if both don't display your particular interest, you should still go for the person who is closer (even if not close) to your personal preferences. Even if it's as small as "this man will help nature and the other will not" or "this woman is pro-life and the other is not".

   

   If absolutely none of the candidates represent your interest (as happened with me at this current election), It's still not that hard to vote for the one who seems to be able to do the least harm!

   # kent Says:

   November 8th, 2010 at 8:24 pm

   

   I agree with Paul Tempesta #4 & with Laura #6 above whole heartidly. That's why we didn't vote in this last election.

   

   Too much negative advertisement and we didn't like either candidate.

   # Deric Says:

   November 25th, 2010 at 4:44 am

   

   Voting is just half of the issue. To those who don't vote because they don't like the candidates, what have you done to fix it? We are their bosses! They are elected to represent the people but they cannot do that if no one tells them what they are doing right or wrong. When is the last time you wrote, called, emailed, tweeted, or just talked to your representative? I don't like the candidates anymore than most people so I vote for whomever seems to be closest to my beliefs. But our job doesn't end there – why hire someone to represent you but not tell them what to represent?

   # uh-shawn Rev Says:

   December 9th, 2010 at 11:39 am

   

   When you are looking at a candidate, there is not one that will suit your every need. You need to look at their website and make an INFORMED decision! Some people just vote for who their friends are telling them to vote for or because they like the name of a candidate. There are those that vote stupidly to put it bluntly, but if you would look at the candidate and what they stand for they might surprise you. I do not agree with everything that a politician says and i know they lie, we all do. If anything pick the lesser evil, if that is what it really comes down to. If you have a problem with the candidates, then push for better ones. Don't just give up on voting, demand more from your government and your local politicians. The politicians of today have a chance at becoming the President in the future.

   # christopher wildcard kinney Says:

   January 24th, 2011 at 12:02 am

   

   I could not agree with Deric (10) more. The complaints about neither candidate representing enough of what you agree or disagree with is largly the fault of the people that don't vote, that don't speak their voice in one of the aforementioned ways and say I'll just sit at home and watch the country fall apart. Get off your butt, get involved in the political process starting at a local level and gather enough people that share your beliefs as to how the country should be run. There is strength in numbers and your representitives are a lot more likely to listen. Don't blame the state of the union on congress blame it on the ones who don't do anything to change it.

[coinchop]

I vote because I belive my vote might help me  

   get some of something I want, which is to me

   better than none of nothing.

   

   Also based on the above posts I might be going

   into the sign business so I would have a night

   job if I were to become president.

   

   A lot of lives were lost in the past to help gain

   us the right to vote. Would be a shame if they

   gave for nothing...

   

   Just my bucks worth.. .02 cents won't buy a ***

   thing anymore.

[westerly1965]

Coin im pretty sure your going into the sign business and running for pres in 12 at least that's what I heard....

[westerly1965]

And Bud good post I'm with you on that....if we aren't willing to fight for it soon there will be nothing to fight for...

[lohman446]

I am not suggesting not voting.  However, if the Libertarian party (for instance) had a showing of 15% then the Republican party would get the message loud and clear.  Its my hope the Tea Party will have done this.  I am not suggesting not voting, because being silent will not help.  I am suggesting however showing the mainstream candidates what you actually want.  Doing so is not throwing your vote away - if there is a third party candidate (or fourth or fifth) that better reflects your wants in government give them your vote.  Even when they do not win the major parties will not ignore it.

   

   The two party system as it exists today is giving you a false choice.  You have other choices for your vote, and you should vote the one that you actually want, not the one you have to "settle" fore.

[kwb]

"The two party system as it exists today is giving you a false choice. You have other choices for your vote, and you should vote the one that you actually want, not the one you have to "settle" fore."

   

   I rather like that. Indeed,get out and vote as the only way to force changes is at the ballot box under our constitution.