Author Topic: Suttle's Joined "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" (Read 5266 times)

Cathy1911 · « **on:** August 17, 2009, 04:39:49 PM »

Are we surprised?

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/members/members.shtml#NE

One more reason to recall him, not that the next guy would be any better.

armed and humorous · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2009, 04:54:09 PM »

I'm not saying that Suttle's approach is the way to go, but I don't have a problem with anyone who wants to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. What I do have a problem with is the people who try to make criminals out of people for simply owning or carrying guns. I see Lincoln's mayor is also part of the coalition. If you didn't read it, you should probably at least look at the mission statement, or whatever they call it, of the coalition. If there was a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, we wouldn't have to be so concerned about self-defense and could concentrate more on targets and hunting. The way I see it stiffer penalties for actual crimes is the way to keep guns out of criminals' hands. If they're in jail, they probably aren't going to have one.

David Hineline · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:15:55 PM »

How about we keep criminals out of society. If a person is not locked up then they should be trusted. Why are we releasing people into society that can not be trusted to own a tool.

FarmerRick · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:45:19 PM »

Quote from: David Hineline on August 17, 2009, 05:15:55 PM

How about we keep criminals out of society. If a person is not locked up then they should be trusted. Why are we releasing people into society that can not be trusted to own a tool.

Because the libs think criminals can be "rehabilitated". Hardly ever the case.

Blkcat · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2009, 06:57:50 PM »

"If a person is not locked up then they should be trusted." You have got to be kidding me!! Do you believe ALL miscreants have been locked up??

I support the 2nd Amendment and the right for honest citizens to keep and bear arms, BUT I do NOT condone the bearing of arms by felons and gangbangers. RIGHTS come with RESPONSIBILITIES. I see nothing wrong (or anti-2nd Amendment) with getting guns out of the hands of criminals. I understand the difficulties of dealing with terms like "illegal guns" - that's a bad choice of words, but I am in favor of getting guns out of the hands of criminals!

Cathy1911 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2009, 06:58:18 PM »

Bloomberg's organization wants to keep guns out of the wrong hands, all right. To them, all guns should be illegal, and ours are the wrong hands.

We see criminals get arrested and then be back out on the street before the arresting officer's paperwork is done, all the time. The national clearance rate for all reported violent crimes is a pathetic 44.5%. Only 25.4% of robberies are cleared.

For property crimes, the rate is even worse, 16.5%. And it's estimated that less than half of all violent crime is reported at all.

Add to that our officials telling us to just cooperate and not defend ourselves, and nobody should wonder why there are so many criminals.

bkoenig · « **Reply #6 on:** August 17, 2009, 08:59:06 PM »

Quote from: FarmerRick on August 17, 2009, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: David Hineline on August 17, 2009, 05:15:55 PM
How about we keep criminals out of society. If a person is not locked up then they should be trusted. Why are we releasing people into society that can not be trusted to own a tool.

Because the libs think criminals can be "rehabilitated". Hardly ever the case.

Slightly off topic, but I do believe if someone is going to be released from prison (and most of them will be, eventually) we have to do something to attempt to rehabilitate them. Teach them a trade, get them an education, etc. Most do reoffend, but without some life skills it's almost certain they will. I'm in favor of tough sentencing, but at the same time we should be using their time in prison as an opportunity to push them in the right direction. I guess you could say I'm in favor of the carrot AND the stick. Eat the carrot or be beaten by the stick

armed and humorous · « **Reply #7 on:** August 17, 2009, 09:27:41 PM »

I generally believe in a "second chance" for many people who break the law. There are all kinds of circumstances to be considered, including the severity and degree of intent. For the most heinous, willful crimes, no. Those criminals don't get a second chance in my book. For the rest of "first time offenders" I'm okay with a reasonable sentence, and yes, they need to have something legal to do when they get out (though I don't know that it's governments' responsibility to provide that for them). When they repeat the same crime, or move up the crime ladder, they obviously have no regard for the law, no respect for society, no morals, and no more opportunities as far as I'm concerned. Hang 'em, and hang 'em high. Then bury 'em, and bury the shovel! Or, if you really think it's cheaper, or more moral, keep 'em in jail for the rest of their life. But, make 'em work for their room and board. If you don't make prisons a place they don't want to come back to, they'll come back.

huskergun · « **Reply #8 on:** August 17, 2009, 09:37:21 PM »

Good post Cathy. Anyone who has not looked into this group of Mayors needs to. They are all anti Second Amendment.
Educate yourselfs and let Suttle know how you feel about him joining Bloomberg.

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5099

Bloomberg Wants to "Counter" the NRA

Friday, August 14, 2009

It is old news to gun owners that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is not a friend. As one of the leading proponents of new gun laws, Bloomberg has already earned his place in the Second Amendment rights hall of shame. But apparently, Hizzoner does not believe he is doing enough to destroy our rights.

On an appearance on "Meet the Press," Bloomberg announced that he would raise money to counter the influence of the NRA. Bloomberg was on the show to trumpet the 39 votes he was able to muster to squeak out a narrow defeat of national Right-to-Carry reciprocity. (To read more about the Thune/Vitter amendment, click here.) He took the opportunity to lament that the NRA has so much influence -- and took upon himself the role of countering that influence.

Of course, as anti-gunners regularly do, Bloomberg ignores the fact that the NRA only has clout because we represent the beliefs of tens of millions of Americans who oppose the anti-gun agenda. Recent polling has repeatedly shown that the majority of Americans support the individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

And though it must be very frustrating to mayor Bloomberg, that support is growing. A recent poll by Zogby International revealed that 83% of Americans support Right-to-Carry laws. Bloomberg will no doubt continue to trumpet the 39-vote procedural "victory," but the reality is, the American people are on the side of Second Amendment freedoms.

Perhaps part of the problem is the inherent dishonesty of Bloomberg's position. He claims to be opposed to "Illegal" guns, but his latest effort targeted the rights of law-abiding people who already carry a gun legally. To Bloomberg, any gun he does not like is an "illegal" gun.

Mayor Bloomberg and his group "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" represent a serious threat because of the attention the media will give them and the resources a billionaire like Bloomberg has at his disposal. That's the money he is once again promising to use to fight against our Second Amendment rights.

Fortunately, America's law-abiding gun owners know how to fight the misinformation and anti-gun rhetoric of Mayor Bloomberg and his allies. NRA will continue to closely monitor Bloomberg's anti-gun activities and will keep you informed about his efforts.

JimP · « **Reply #9 on:** August 17, 2009, 10:57:50 PM »

"Eat the carrot or be beaten by the stick"

Problem there: That is EXACTLY what Professional Voters do: sit there eating .gov carrots.

The carrot and stick thing is for mules- get them to chase THE carrot or fear being beaten by THE stick. As used by the .gov, they just keep shoveling carrots that we have to pay for, and threaten to use a twig .....

DanClrk51 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2009, 12:38:26 AM »

Quote from: armed and humorous on August 17, 2009, 04:54:09 PM

What I do have a problem with is the people who try to make criminals out of people for simply owning or carrying guns.

I agree. This is one of the big problems right there. Lets not punish people for having the mere ability to defend themselves or cause harm, lets punish people when they actually do cause harm or brake the basic laws such as theft, burglary, robbery, assault, rape, murder, arson. If anybody who can legally own a gun can carry one (concealed or unconcealed) without needing a permit than we would be better off as a society. More criminals would get shot or fended off by defensive firearm use while committing a crime, resulting in less crime because people will think twice and thus less people to put in prison.

Dark Helmet · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2009, 04:46:09 PM »

oh good grief... I didn't know Buetler was on the list...

hmmmm, I'm thinking letter-writing campaign is in order to innundate these guys.

someone have a sample so i don't have to think up something civil?

FarmerRick · « **Reply #12 on:** September 11, 2009, 08:18:37 PM »

Ralston's Mayor Donald Groesser is a member also.

Any NFOA members live in Ralston? Time to send some letters!

GunFun · « **Reply #13 on:** September 14, 2009, 12:15:12 AM »

My Dad and I were talking about this the other day (he is a retired Green Beret with 2 tours in Vietnam and a tour in Korea) and he thinks that gangs should be labeled as terrorists (and I have to agree with him that they are), and spec ops should be assigned to go in and wipe them out.

One good special operator should be able to take out an entire gang with the right intelligence.

To me that honestly makes a lot more sense than any gun control measure I've ever heard of, and would be a huge incentive to the uneducated kids in the area to try to get an education, get out of their ghetto lifestyle, and do something productive.

9/11 was a huge wake up call to America (which has probably been mostly forgotten), but we have terrorists right here in Omaha in my opinion.

Thoughts?

JimP · « **Reply #14 on:** September 14, 2009, 09:06:15 AM »

Gunfun, be careful with what you ask for as far as .gov power is concerned: Government troops killing citizens, no matter how poorly behaved is a VERY dangerous thing.

Think about it: What if your Government labeled gun owners as domestic terrorists? They ALREADY have, only they used the word "potential" to water it down.......

Don't let the Government use any problem, no mater how big or small, to stomp on this or that group's rights, or you will one day find that the group that gets stomped upon is you.

GunFun · « **Reply #15 on:** September 14, 2009, 06:32:15 PM »

Quote from: JimP on September 14, 2009, 09:06:15 AM

Gunfun, be careful with what you ask for as far as .gov power is concerned: Government troops killing citizens, no matter how poorly behaved is a VERY dangerous thing.

Think about it: What if your Government labeled gun owners as domestic terrorists? They ALREADY have, only they used the word "potential" to water it down.......

Don't let the Government use any problem, no mater how big or small, to stomp on this or that group's rights, or you will one day find that the group that gets stomped upon is you.

Good point, for sure.

But I think we need to find a better alternative than "Gun Control" to get the real criminals off the streets, since they don't care about gun control laws, or any laws for that matter.

JimP · « **Reply #16 on:** September 16, 2009, 11:59:07 AM »

"Gun Control" is completely inneffective at reducing crime. Someone who intent on robbery, assault, rape, or murder could not give three farts in a windstorm about the fact that his gun is not registered or that he is prohibited from having the gun in the first place.

Additional gun laws only serve to harass the Law Abiding gun owner, and to discourage the sheep from becoming gun owners.

huskergun · « **Reply #17 on:** September 16, 2009, 03:58:22 PM »

Maybe we could all call or write Mr. Suttle and try to change his mind.

RLMoeller · « **Reply #18 on:** September 16, 2009, 04:53:13 PM »

Quote from: huskergun on September 16, 2009, 03:58:22 PM

Maybe we could all call or write Mr. Suttle and try to change his mind.

No maybe about it. As many people as possible should hit him up.

In my initial email to him I included information from other articles and provided links about other mayors that have publicly resigned from the organization once they found out the political agenda. I haven't heard any response back and I still need to make the phone call.

GunFun · « **Reply #19 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:52:06 PM »

If you have those links already can you post them?

I would be glad to send him an email myself.

Got a "canned" response from the emails I sent to our representatives about the confirmation recently, I hope they did some good. Obviously a lot of people must have sent emails because they all voted against that anti's confirmation from our state, at least.