CNN Newsroom is calling out Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity about creating false panic over gun rights!

[ddeclue]

:popcorn:

I can't wait to see this story coming up this hour!

:bounce:

[grantcart]

1. Well CNN is developing 1/100th of a testicle

[Better Believe It]

5. And they are about the size of mice testicles!

:)

[ShortnFiery]

13. It's almost Easter ... soft and fuzzy? Cotton Balls!

[ddeclue]

21. It looks like they are getting ready to lay blame for one of the recent shootings on Sean and Glenn

they pretty much said so in the next teaser:

What you are hearing is the sound of three police officers being killed. The killer feared his guns were gonna be taken away. Who put that thought into his head? There are 1.2 million people who believe this.

Sounds like they are getting ready to slap Glenn and Sean upside the head on CNN Live after the break!

:bounce:

:popcorn:

[Tim01]

2. Obama, Holder, Clinton, Pelosi, Kerry.False?

[ronnykmarshall]

6. Whatcha talking about?

[Mz Pip]

8. False what?? n/t

[Lex]

11. Is that supposed to be a complete thought?

nt

[ddeclue]

16. I think to fill in some blanks that the person above is asking in a mocking tone

that is it really true that all these politicians AREN'T trying to take peoples guns?

He's making fun of freepers.

[kestrel91316]

18. How, exactly, has Obama tried to take people's guns away?

Please cite an executive order or legislation he has signed.

I am tired of this hysterical BS.

[ddeclue]

23. He HAS NOT.. nobody here thinks he has...

Doug D.

[Tim01]

27. All these people have recently said they want to ban *assault rifles*

except for Obama who has it on his website right now that he plans to ban *assault rifles*, it is on his public agenda, always has been.

[EC]

33. Assault rifles are a bit different than guns

for protection or hunting...The only ones that want assault rifles are nuts and gangstas (people who want to kill people)....no one in their right mind hunts with one (if they want to eat their prey anyway)and protection of home is better served with a shot-gun or if you're a descent shot a hand-gun...


so...so what if they want to re-ban the assault rifle?

[Tim01]

36. Would it help

if I sent you a pic of the nice deer I took with my AR15 this year? The semi-auto are the most popular rifles in this country. Did you know that? Mine is used for varmint control and hunting. Varmint hunters love them. They don't damage meat an more than any other gun, actually a bit less. Does that matter to you?

[leeroysphitz]

39. No it doesn't matter. You don't need an assault rifle to hunt.

You just don't.

Your desire to posses military grade small arms makes you suspect. Your unsupervised possession of same makes you an intolerable threat to your community.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

43. Assault rifles are strictly regulated and very few are owned in the entire country.

It costs 10's of thousands of dollars to obtain the permits and purchase military grade small arms. It really helps to be informed.

David

[leeroysphitz]

56. "Assault rifles are strictly regulated and very few are owned in the entire country."

Um... Good.

[Tim01]

44. After my somewhat limited exposure to DU

I have come to the belief that the loud fanatical anti-second amendment people are a small minority, pretty surprised actually. Gun-guys like me,and a large group of democrats who don't want their rights trampled AND don't want people shooting up the place, then the small group of hysterical anti-gun folks who only know that guns scare them.
The middle group listens to reason.

[leeroysphitz]

49. Enjoy your stay. n/t

[Tim01]

51. Thanks. I like everything here except the anti-2nd amendment crowd.

[leeroysphitz]

55. I'm pro 2nd amendment., you have the right to own firearms. I wouldn't change that

even if I could so don't accuse me of not supporting the constitution just because I won't get behind every screwball gun nut's "machine gun" fetish.

There has to be a line. What does a Claymore mine and a colt AR-15 have in common? Not very much except for the facts that 1. they were both designed and manufactured specifically for military use and specifically to damage human beings and 2. you don't need either for hunting (animals).

[Tim01]

57. Need. This again, huh?

How about a list of all the dangerous things we have that kill people , don't need, and are not in any way protected by the constitution.

Start with HUNTING

[leeroysphitz]

58. There are plenty of things you can have that you don't NEED. There are plenty of things you can do

that you don't NEED to but some of those things may make you a danger to your neighbors and you should be prevented from having or doing them.

Your right to pretend that you are John Rambo running around in the woods playing army men does not supersede my families right to exist and be safe.

How can I put it any plainer? The fact that you think you need access to a weapon like the AR-15 makes you a threat the fact that actually POSSES one makes you an intolerable threat and if you were my neighbor I wouldn't allow you to come anywhere near my home or family.

[Tim01]

59. Anybody who owns an ar15 is an intolerable threat to you and your family?

You are so emotional there is no room in your thinking process for reason. You are irrational.

[leeroysphitz]

60. When I was in Basic Training back in the late 80s They taught us quit a bit about the M-16.

One of the things I learned was that the M-16, in conjunction with standard issue 5.56mm "ball" type ammo, was designed to not necessarily kill enemy personnel but to wound them, severely. Wound them to the point where a number of additional enemy personnel are required to assist the wounded man, thus multiplying the number of enemy personnel taken out of the fight.

This makes a great deal of sense from a military stand point and is a tactic that has seen a great deal of success on battlefields around the world. Now does it sound as though this weapon were designed with ANY civilian application in mind? No, of course not. So why should civilians have access to them?

I grew up in Michigan. Every other person here in Detroit heads "up north" every November for deer hunting season. We all eat what we shoot but none of us NEED to hunt to eat. To a man every hunter I've ever met hunts for sport, not out of necessity. OK I'm sure you can pull some rare far flung anecdotes about so and so who hasn't been to the grocery store in 25 years or whatever but admit it hunting is a sport and sports are a form of recreation.

I think of people who have the desire to use a weapon that was specifically designed to damage other humans for recreational purposes as, at least slightly, disturbed. I'd rather not have gun toting disturbed people near me or my family.

This is my rationale for saying we, as Americans, have the right to bear arms but we also have the right to draw a common sense line and say to those that do not know any better "No. You don't have the right to buy a Kalashnikov at Wal Mart."

[Tim01]

61. Geneva convention for the ball ammo. Wounding is a side effect.

Them telling you it was on purpose was just to make the troops feel better. Hunting ammo from walmart is a lot more "destructive,dangerous,mean, aggressive,deadly " than military ammo.
Kalashnikov at walmart? Please, not a chance. Maybe a saige. AK round is about like a 30-30.
Semi-auto versus a lever gun. Come on, how much difference is there really.
Hunting for sport? So ban hunting, not protected by the constitution anyway.
Guns are protected by the constitution, the reason has nothing to do with hunting. Hunting is not protected at all. Ban hunting. It could happen tomorrow, nothing to stop it.

Seriously, you have enough knowledge to know better. What are you up to?

[DrCory]

54. If That Is The Case...

Why don't you turn him in to the appropriate law enforcement agency?

"Your desire to posses military grade small arms makes you suspect. Your unsupervised possession of same makes you an intolerable threat to your community."

By the way, who elected you as the arbiter of need?

[Supersedeas]

42. Are you that concerned about the damage meat of your varmits??

As for hunting bigger game, are you saying you can't do with an AR15? A 30/30 won't do?

[FudaFuda]

40. 2nd amendment has fuckall to do with hunting. nt

[janx]

41. The problem lies in the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon.

I wish people could get this sussed out. Some people think that semi-automatic firearms (you don't have to load a round, or bullet, every time) are assault weapons.

Assault weapons don't necessarily mean machine guns or even quasi machine guns.

So someone could--as I have in the past--own a collector Browning .22 rifle that would shoot eleven bullets (rounds) without having to cock the thing to load each individual bullet. And that would be considered an assault rifle. It's ridiculous.

But even more ridiculous is the inability of gun lobbyists and legislators to come to some agreement about this definition.

[Jim__]

45. Please provide a link to Obama's website where he states he is going to ban assault rifles. - n/t

[Tim01]

48. Link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/

Under "agenda"

"They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."


You already knew this, right? I thought everybody knew this. He doesn't keep it a secret he plans to ban "assault weapons".

[Canuckistanian]

29. Ummmm.... Who are Famous Democratic Politicians!

I'll take "Potent Potables" for $400, Alex.

[hlthe2b]

30. Keep it up Tim01

and you'll be Tombstone01... :eyes:

[Mojorabbit]

31. He is right

All have brought it up recently.

[hlthe2b]

37. Ahh, GD becomes the Gungeon once again...

I have never understood the obsession with assault rifles. If there were moves to take hunting rifles and hand guns, I'd probably understand, but assault rifles (spare me the semantic arguments that there is no definition for an assault rifle) are desirable for one reason only--to efficiently kill humans.


I've had enough gun arguments lately, so with apologies, I will not be entertaining the usual vitriolic responses this time around...

[Mojorabbit]

53. I am only saying that his statement was accurate. nt

[Tim01]

38. Please get me a list of things I am not allowed to mention. I'll follow the rules.

[EOTE]

46. Microwave, pickle jar, peanut butter, toad stool, Rent-A-Center. True!

[tekisui]

3. I hope they mention how Beck keeps calling for a Revolution,

but leaves it vague enough for some crazy ass nut job to interpret it on their own. He is sowing seed of hate and anger that he can't control. He is a paranoid, lunatic inciting violence.

[BOSSHOG]

10. The teabag thing is pure conservative ignorance

The Boston Tea Party was based on taxation without representation. Americans were more then well represented in November during our national elections. beck should get off the radio and do what he does best, get drunk. He'd be less of an embarrassment to his family.

[tekisui]

15. His incitement of anger is baseless.

He just is pissed and claims to speak for others who are pissed, without saying anything. He doesn't say a damn thing, just whips people into a frenzy.

[tridim]

22. And worse yet, he's doing it only for ratings and money.

[Golden Raisin]

25. But he has been given

a powerful and visible public, televised forum (courtesy of our agenda-driven and pot-stirring corporate media) where he's not just some wacko voice crying in the proverbial wilderness, but where he has a good chance of inciting the next Timothy McVeigh. But (thankfully and no thanks to BushCo) we still have freedom of speech in this country so I don't know what the answer is. Beck is truly a repulsoid as are his corporate backers and enablers.

[janx]

17. That's the only thing about these shenanigans that pisses me off.

To compare this fiasco with the Boston Tea Party is so ridiculous as to be anti-American.

[Tim01]

12. Oh that's helpful. I don't listen to him. Revolution? Perfect.

It isn't like that kind of talk would give some nutjob the idea that he is some kind of patriot if he shoots the place up.

Why does this all sound like the suicide bombers?

[tekisui]

19. The worse part is he doesn't define anything.

He doesn't stand FOR anything. Just the cryptic "what America used to be". And he is against everything else, just as ill defined. He says progressivism is socialism/nazism/communism/totalitarianism by a different name. He doesn't define it, only fans the flames of fear, paranoia and anger. Then yells REVOLUTION! like that means something. The whackos will just each define it for themselves, and people are going to get hurt.

[Mojorabbit]

32. More heartbreaking to me

is one of my sisters told me the other day she watches him and he makes a lot of sense. Never in a million years would I have expected that from her.

[janx]

35. She can't see that it's an act?

? :shrug:

[Mojorabbit]

52. I guess not

and she is a really intelligent person which is why this surprises me. Her husband watches Fox news and I am guessing they are getting a really skewed version of current events.

[Tim01]

47. In all honesty, I find the republicans behavior embarrasing.

They lost. They got clobbered. They got their asses handed to them. So what do they do?
"Obama sucks"
Can you be more specific?
"He's ruining the country!"
Do you have an example?
"He just is! You're un American!"
I'm what?
"Revolution!"
What the hell are you talking about?

*sigh*

[LSparkle]

4. Wonder if they'd be targeting Beck if he were still on HLN ...

How did he leave HLN/CNN -- was it on good or bad terms?
In any event, I'm sure CNN is glad to be rid of him, considering
how he's gone off the deep end of late.

[ddeclue]

9. IDK but their teaser "first personed" them as "Glen" and "Sean"

with rising intonation as in

Why are you telling lies Glen??? Sean?? They used their pictures too..

:rofl:

[rvablue]

24. Bad terms. He claims that he wanted to go over to Fox

the truth is either his contract was not renewed or he was fired.

But HLN did not want him on anymore do to his incendiary rhetoric.

[ShortnFiery]

7. Finally! I hope they cover that Guy who shot up a Knoxville, TN Unitarian Church ...

because he hates LIBERALS. :crazy: :(

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25882063/

Adkisson "stated that he had targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of the major media outlets," investigator Steve Still wrote

[BOSSHOG]

14. No doubt

some patriotic conservative scholar knows that the intent of the founding fathers was to arm citizens for the purpose of killing liberals. Its right there in the second amendment.

[Warpy]

20. It would be interesting to see how much gun lobby money

is now going to Pox News to increase sales, now that they no longer have their own offices in the White House and Congress*.


*something they boasted about after Stupid was put into office against the will of the voters.

[ShortnFiery]

26. Yeah, both FOX and NRA like em "Big and Stupid!"

Give me a big ugly "G" boys!?! :nuke:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7VCHj2OSdw

Frightening thought at the caliber (couldn't resist :P) of people ARMED TO THE TEETH.

I hope they remember as they're arming their trusty claymores around da security perimeter, that it's not embossed "FRONT TOWARD ENEMY" for nothing. :wow: :crazy:

[janx]

28. I'd like to see CNN ask those two about their Revolution rhetoric

and also ask them about who is funding this "grassroots" movement.

Edited to add this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5414245

[mudesi]

34. Didn't CNN HIRE Beck?

Fuck them. They're just mad he left.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

50. BINGO

They're responsible for Beck being a TV presence.
They wanted to bring Limbaugh on board, too - but his price was too high.
They also let Bob Novakula produce half their Washington coverage for two decades.
Screw CNN. let them continue to remain in third place irrelevancy.

[teeka]

62. Gun sales are the only thing going UP in this country & for a reason other than Sanchez

It is a fact, that gun sales & ammunition have skyrocketed since Barack Obama was elected. It was just about a month ago that our new attorney general Eric Holder inferred that Americans were giving their guns to drug lords along the Mexican border? And since we need to help Mexico out--it's time to "ban" fully automatic guns in this country. Too late, Mr. Holder, Ronald Reagan did that back in the 1980's. What we have today are semi-automatic weapons, not fully automatic. So millions have been running to the gun store down the street to get one before they are banned.

I am a believer in one being able to provide for their own self-defense. If we ban guns in this country the only ones that will have them will be criminals.

It is our constitutional right to bear arms & I sure don't like to see anyone trying to sit on that. Obama has been against gun-ownership since his days in the Illinois state legislature, but in order to get elected he had to disguise himself as friendly to it.

Now, I know I am immediately going to get someone on this board that will mention the killings in N.Y that went on last week that killed 14 people. I just have one question for you? What if someone in that building had a gun to stop him?