About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Dobbs' fearmongering segment on gun rights dominated by conservative advocates

September 29, 2009 11:35 am ET

From the September 28 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 11:41 am ET)
      1  
      That's nothing new. Even mainstream programs do that.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NG_Officer (September 29, 2009 11:42 am ET)
      1  
      Well , duh
      We liberals all hate guns and despise a well-regulated militia.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 12:44 pm ET)
           
        The conservatives ignore the words "well-regulated" and "militia," and believe the Second Amendment only contains the Second Clause.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (September 29, 2009 11:52 am ET)
      1  
      What attempts? What laws have been introduced in the U.S. Congress to enact more gun regulation?

      You can buy insurance to protect you from abduction by extraterrestrials. Does that mean it is likely to happen? I'm really not impressed by what these people, who are of a piece with those rooting for secession among other foolishness, are afraid of.

      We are the most heavily armed populace on the planet. The government would be crazy to try to take them all away. We could repel an invasion from almost any country on earth, just as an armed civilian population, without any military help at all.

      Cass Sunstein is currently Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, something created in 1980. He is not a 'Gun Czar'. This level of ignorance and... oh, wait. Mr. Dobbs, you're auditioning for FOX Propaganda, aren't you? Sorry. Forgot about that.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (September 29, 2009 12:58 pm ET)
         
      Another fantasy thing by Dobbs.

      Nobody has done anything to regulate guns during the Obama administration, and Obama himself, has come out and said that he firmly believes in the 2nd amendment.

      Is this sort of like how Obama was going to re-introduce the FD even though he said it was a non-starter?

      I heard something interesting the other day. In the US alone, there are 9 billion bullets sold every year. 9 billion. Think about it. That's 30 bullets (or 2 handgun magazines) for every single person living in the United States today. Why?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by The_Cat (September 29, 2009 5:54 pm ET)
           
        I used to go plinking with a bolt action .22 rifle, magnolialover. It's such a small round, and so much fun at, say, 100 yards, that it was not unusual to go through 200-300 rounds in an afternoon. Used to buy big bags of ice cubes, and set them on posts. It's a challenging target at 100 yards, believe me. Also makes a very satisfying little explosion when you hit a cube with a .22 dead on.

        It would be easier to regulate ammo than guns, truthfully. In my opinion, we have sufficient regulation. The problem is, they are not really very strictly enforced. While I do sometimes miss plinking, I find I'm really more of a fan of swords than guns. Perhaps I'm just mellowing with age...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Doug-Life (September 29, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
         
      What's the big deal?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by treize195 (September 29, 2009 2:00 pm ET)
         
      So, why do you need an assault rifle?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dadre (September 29, 2009 4:14 pm ET)
           
        They want assault rifles because more bullet holes the game has in it the better it taste. This is very serious. We need the assault rifles to fend off the invisible mole people....they're fast EVERYWHERE and attack in numbers!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by John Paradox (September 29, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
             
          Wonder if some of these 'hunters' will wind up with lead poisoning from putting 20 rounds into their game.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by The_Cat (September 30, 2009 10:12 am ET)
           
        My simple answer to this question goes like this. Remember the 2nd Amendment, and that bit about 'well regulated militia'? Well, as it turns out, the militia at the time of the Constitution's writing was comprised of all able bodied men over the age of 18. It's duties have largely been taken over by the National Guard, but the National Guard is not the militia. The militia is the final line of defense of the US populace, and as such would require military weaponry, including fully automatic weapons.

        Since the Army is not allowed to police the U.S. citizens, and since private citizens are not allowed to own fully automatic weapons without paying $5000 annually for a license, where do you place SWAT teams? They carry fully automatic M-16s, among other weapons. If the police are allowed to carry them, why not private citizens? You can argue that it's part of their jobs, and I will counter with "As president of my own corporation, I consider it part of my job to carry a fully automatic M-16." What would the difference be? What if I further said my company is a private security firm, as opposed to a public one like the police force?

        I'm not arguing that the average American should have 24/7 access to fully automatic weapons, by the way. I do think they should be taken away from SWAT, however, and far more carefully controlled than they are. The idea of two heavily armed groups (cops and robbers) having a full-auto firefight in my neighborhood is appalling, especially considering the consequences of all those stray bullets.

        Let's get on a plane. Ah, but before we do, the airline requires everyone to either produce a firearm, or choose one from the weapons rack located along the jetway. Now, how many hijackings would that stop? All of them? Of course, you'd have to stop serving alcohol on flights, but that is a small price to pay, right? The security checks would go a lot faster, and your family could go back to accompanying you all the way to the lounge.

        I guess that was kind of long and rambling. The 2nd Amendment is the final answer to tyrants, both foreign and domestic. A just government has nothing to fear from a well armed populace. There. Hope that was better. By the way, I've given up guns, and followed my first love, which was and is swords. Guess I'm just old fashioned.
        Report Abuse