Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Quinn TV ad slams Rauner on assault weapons

Posted in:

Illinois
YouTube

* Today’s hearings into the governor’s 2010 anti-violence initiative may have prompted this Quinn campaign ad blasting Bruce Rauner over his stand on assault weapons. From a press release…

350 Bullets: That’s How Many Bullets a Military-Style Assault Weapon Can Fire During New TV Ad

CHICAGO - 350. That’s the number of bullets a military-style assault weapon with a high-capacity ammunition magazine can fire in the time it takes to watch a new Quinn for Illinois TV ad that highlights Republican billionaire Bruce Rauner’s heartless support for the deadly weapons.

Ignoring communities plagued by gun violence, Rauner has expressed strong support for the ownership of military-style assault weapons and said that use of such deadly weapons should be “up to the owner.”

The new ad points out that, “Assault weapons are designed for just one purpose - to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time.”

* Rate it…

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 8:57 am

Comments

As a perfectionist proofreader I was distracted by the fact that at 0:13 the narrator says “for JUST one purpose” while the text reads “for one purpose”, but that may just be me.

Pretty slow and unaesthetic spot otherwise, but will probably play well in targeted Cook areas.

Am I wrong to assume this will probably not run downstate at all?

Comment by The Lowly LA Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:06 am
LA: I bought it too, but it is actually common for voice-over to track with captioning, but not be word-for-word.

What reads well and what sounds good often aren’t verbatim.

It is a good ad.

The more Rauner struggles to stop talking about “social issues”, the more he gets pulled back in.

Why in the world he didn’t see this coming, and inoculate himself in the suburban housewife ad while he was running it, I do not know.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:12 am
Misleading … ignores the fact individuals / private citizens are banned by federal law from owning fully automatic weapons (what the ad calls assault weapons) without special licenses …

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:13 am
Perhaps this ad is targeting a particular demographic, but our problems are with handguns and not assault weapons of the type that is mentioned in this ad.

C-

Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:15 am
It is a fight for Cook County voters. Didn’t really see this four years ago.

It is also a very stale 2010 theme, even for Chicago.

Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:18 am
350 rounds in 30 seconds? Wow, that’s a magic trigger there. “Assault Weapons” as defined in many variations of bans are semi automatic rifles. Try flexing your trigger finger 350 times in 30 seconds. Now add in 12 magazine changes in addition to trigger pulls. Most “high capacity” magazines are of the 30 round variety. Yes there are 50 & 100 rd drums, but even if you used those, no way there is enough time to shoot 350 rounds.

An ad designed to do nothing but scare uninformed voters.

Comment by Blue Dog Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:18 am
“Ignoring communities plagued by gun violence” - not true. Throw in some stuff about NRI here, but also emphasize the work that Bruce has done as a private citizen to improve those neighborhoods. The Rauner Campaign will have a cake walk rebutting this part.

More importantly here, the discussion needs to be reiterated - rifles do not kill people in the bad parts of town. Overwhelmingly high percentages show hand gun violence kills people. Figures as high as 80%+ of Chicago murders are via handguns.

“350 - That’s the number of bullets a military-style assault weapon with a high-capacity ammunition magazine can fire in the time it takes to watch a new Quinn for Illinois TV ad” - do these idiots not know how weapons work? Obviously, the answer is they don’t. A standard AR-15, what they term a “military assault rifle”, has a 30 round magazine. Even the fastest, most accurate shooter could not empty that magazine and reload 12 new ones in 30 seconds. Absurd. Moronic. Simplistic. I cannot emphasize that any more.

Further, those weapons that are now legal are not fully automatic - does the Quinn Campaign expect us to believe that you can pull a trigger for a single shot 350 times in 30 seconds? Please…

Comment by Happy Gun Owner Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:19 am
GOM “Perhaps this ad is targeting a particular demographic”

The ad will play well with suburban women and City of Chicago residents - its a strong ad to counter the “no social agenda” claims of Rauner.

Comment by Jeepster Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:19 am
Blue Dog, while you make an excellent factual point, I don’t know that (m)any undecided anti-gun undecideds will think of this.

Comment by Robert the Bruce Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:21 am
Didn’t really see this four years ago VanillaMan? What are you talking about? The first TV attack ad against Brady was on assault weapons.

Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:24 am
Rauner’s “strong support for assault weapons” has pretty much boiled down to stating he wants to avoid ending up in front of a judge on second amendment issues. Of course that is more “support” than Quinn gives.

As for the 350 number the Cyclic rate on an m16 (the military version of an Ar 15 fully auto and illegal for citizen possesion) is 700 to 900 rounds per minute. That is the fastest the mechanism can function in an ideal situation. Such as no magazine changes, no mechanical breakdowns, and no human interaction. I quess we should give PQ credit he didn’t say 450 rnds.

Of course the target group won’t question the ad so perhaps he should have said 450.

A lot of half truths here but this year that is to be expected.

While it is true Rauner

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:46 am
If I’m Rauner i hope Quinn plays this South of I-80.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:47 am
Mason - Maybe Rauner will pay to have it played south of I-80!

Comment by Happy Gun Owner Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:48 am
Question: when did gun rights/gun control depending on what side one is on become a “social issue” or part of a “social agenda” as several here have stated today? This is a final- month- before- the-election attack ad in the traditional vein and proud tradition of attack ads so C-, but a social issue? Not so much.

Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:55 am
That’s one big “clip” I guess.

They did spell “assault” correctly, though.

Marginally factual and misleading.

D.

Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:56 am
This is a wonderful, hard-hitting ad, attacking Rauner’s imaginary endorsement of the sale of fully automatic “military style assault weapons.”
1. It ignores the fact that federal law, not state law, bans the unregistered ownership of fully automatic firearms.
2. It ignores the near physical impossibility of firing 350 rounds in 30 seconds from a legal, semi-automatic firearm.
3. It raises and reinforces the “assault weapon” bogeyman.
4. It hits on emotions, especially among women, and
5. Links those emotions to, assumes and preys on the ignorance of voters.
As a student of political science, the psychology and methodology of ads from both parties has been, unfortunately, disgustingly amazing.

Comment by Motambe Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:00 am
It’s a red meat play for Dems in the Chicago area - a good ad - give it a B+ knowing what it’s for.

Comment by siriusly Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:02 am
I’m having a hard time finding the Slate article dated 1/7/13 that supports the 350 round farce, but I did find this Slate article on the AR-15 from 1/2/13 where they clearly state an effective rate of 45 rounds per minute or 22.5 rounds in 30 seconds for the math challenged at Quinn HQ.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/01/02/gun_control_ar_15_rifle_the_nra_claims_the_ar_15_rifle_is_for_hunting_and.html

I understand the point of political ads is not to be accurate & only to tell us how terrible the other guy is. I get it, fear works. It’s why negative ads are so effective. You may not have to be the most accurate with facts, but flat out lying shouldn’t be allowed either.

Comment by Blue Dog Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:03 am
It is a fight for Cook County voters. Didn’t really see this four years ago.

Didn’t really see this four years ago VanillaMan? What are you talking about? The first TV attack ad against Brady was on assault weapons.

‘Sigh’
What part of really fighting for voters in Cook County this year, compared to four years ago, is incorrect?

I also wrote that the issue was stale, because it was overdone in 2010.

Try. Reading. Slower.

Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:05 am
Bad ad. Not because it is inaccurate, but because it is just too late in the campaign to bring up new topics.

They should hammer on the themes that have been working for them, and throw in a couple of new positive ads to round it off.

Comment by walker Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:08 am
If the goal of firearms policy is to reduce firearms homicides, going after assault weapons is classic Quinn: showmanship over substance.

But since “Conservative” culture warriors have taken to bringing assault weapons to stores and political demonstrations…

When “Conservatives” started doing this, my sympathy for cracking down on assault weapons went up.

The cowardice of “Conservatives” should not put my physical safety in jeopardy. It should be harder for people with poor judgment to obtain firearms.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:16 am
funny, can you do an add that tells how many people have been stabbed to death or killed by a driver txting….so now we need to give up being able to cut things and driving or cell phone use?

Comment by Brian Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:16 am
Since I am not a gun person I did not know anything about assault weapons, how they work, or how many rounds they can legally fire. Since I didn’t know these things the ad resonated with me. I am concerned about crime in some areas of my city. I feel for the honest people who aren’t even safe inside their homes because of what is happening in the streets. This ad will particularily appeal to women voters.

Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:17 am
Umm, Brian, pretty sure texting while driving is now a violation of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Nice try though.

Comment by Juice Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:21 am
Didn’t see this one coming. Like Walk, I’m not sure why you raise the issue when other things are working.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:22 am
Word

“Didn’t see this one coming. Like Walk, I’m not sure why you raise the issue when other things are working.”

Maybe market research indicated this as a topic that would resonate with voters, especially females.

Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:24 am
Happy

I don’t think so. As Oswego Willy likes to point out Rauner has chosen to try the ambigous route to get to a +1 win over Quinn. If he plays this then he accepts it making waves for his Cook CO. push. Pq runs it doesn’t hurt him anymore than it is now.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:25 am
I’m gonna agree with walker too.

The Quinn campaign changing the subject is a Rauner-esque mistake at this point.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:25 am
My quess for Why Pq is bringing it out is it’s a free one.

Almost Anyone that views gun ownership as a key factor in voting is most likely firmly in the not PQ camp. He hasn’t exactly been subtle about blaming legal gun owners for all matters of problems.

Whereas if he gets BR to refute it, especially if he goes overboard doing it, has potential to push more of the non-pg vote to Grimm.

So little downside big potential upside.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:32 am
=== wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:22 am:

Didn’t see this one coming. Like Walk, I’m not sure why you raise the issue when other things are working.===

I’m not a gun guy either, but I agree with these two guys. The gun guys are more loyal to that issue than almost any other. Not sure what the thinking was here unless he’s still having a hard time with a particular demo in his base. I get how this polls with women. But geographically, women differ. This is aimed in a pretty targeted way. The closer we get; everything matters. Not sure this one was worth the risk.

Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:39 am
Clearly playing to his base, which he clearly understands knows nothing about guns except that they are all bad.

I take it that he has given up on trying to convince anyone that he is the better candidate, and it is now all about pandering to the base to get turnout.

Comment by Harry Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:45 am
Quick question- how many NRA members will vote for Quinn? So obviously this ad is another to shore up the D’s base voters and for suburban women . Both candidates are micro targeting. As a gun owner I get it. I’m surprised so many on this thread have spent time ranting on the inacuracies of rounds per minute- the folks this is aimed at don’t like guns so 350 or 44 rounds per minute means nothing to them. Shoring up the base

Comment by Roadiepig Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:46 am
Like I’ve said, I get he’s shoring up the base by using fear. He shouldn’t be allowed to flat out lie in doing so. Quinn has said an “Assault Weapons” ban is part of his priorities. Using airwaves to spread false information in an attempt to influence that debate is unethical. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, not their own facts.

As for “gun guys” and voting. True not many are going to vote Quinn, but does anyone really think they’re going to vote for Rahm’s fishing buddy either?

Comment by Blue Dog Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:09 am
scary. effective with the Chicago area.

Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:09 am
I don’t buy the argument that this polls better with women. Are men in favor of school massacres?

The fact of the matter is, the United States, unlike the rest of the Western World, will accept random mass gun killings rather than place serious restrictions on access to guns and ammo.

I thought Newtown was a game changer. I was way wrong. There have been plenty of massacres since. Game over, for now.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:12 am
Scary ad for folks that don’t know anything about firearms. I guess that is the intended audience.

Comment by Tequila Mockingbird Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:16 am
C-

It is an aggressive ad on a tangential issue.

Too many people are dying, but it has little to do with assault weapons.

Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:19 am
Great ad to GOTV against Quinn over nearly all the state.

Comment by Bird Dog Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:27 am
It is a Blue State.

Quinn is running the ad because the issue polls effectively.

You can question whether it is well done, but the imagery is very clear.

Quinn isn’t playing for suburban women solely, he is making a play for parents.

Notice the add didn’t say “Fire 350 bullets”

It said “Sprayed a room with 350 deadly bullets.”

Room, as in “classroom”.

I grew up in Southern Illinois, so I have always been a little “meh” about gun ads.

But now I am a dad whose four year-old goes to school.

Anyone who doesn’t think this is an effective ad is simply wrong.

On the one issue that is most important to every parent - their child’s safety - it is a pretty visceral distinction between Rauner and Quinn.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:56 am
The ad may appeal to some in Cook County where the election will probably be decided. For some voter groups, such as those on the firing line daily, it may have some appeal. For those in the know, including some anti-gun voters, the errors and overstatements in the video may be too much and thus a turn off. Add its slow pace and for many people this will not be a very effective ad.

Comment by Hit or Miss Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:57 am
Ok so is it just me and the gun techie side of things, but why are live rounds falling witht he other casings. Doesn’t make sense — from a technical point of view.

Didn’t know Rauner was for leagalizing full -autos. Since the add implies that spomehting is already illegal with the phrase “leagize” sale of. . .

It plays to Quinn’s base, aimed at the cook referendum and just kinda weak overall C rated.

Comment by Todd Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:58 am
===Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 11:56 am:

It is a Blue State.===

Actually it’s a Red State, with a really big Blue city that can be overwhelming. Blue City, Purple County Suburbs, Pink Collars, and Red as Mars downstate. Working the shades is where it’s at now, right?

Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 12:12 pm
The stage is set over at WTVP-TV Channel 47 for some political fireworks — a debate between Gov. Pat Quinn and Republican challenger Bruce Rauner, the main combatants in the governor’s race in Illinois. The show airs at 8 p.m. Thursday, a program that will be picked up by public TV and radio stations around the state.

Jak Tichenor, host of Illinois Lawmakers from Carbondale’s WSIU-TV will serve as moderator while questions will be served up H. Wayne Wilson, host of 47’s At Issue; Amanda Vinicky, statehouse bureau chief of Springfield’s WUIS-FM; and Jamey Dunn, statehouse bureau chief of Illinois Issues magazine.

You remember the Rumble in the Jungle? That’s what they called the boxing match between Ali and Foreman staged in Africa back in 1974. Perhaps we can call this encounter Scorn in the Corn.

Comment by Peoria guy Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 12:41 pm
- Roadiepig - Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 10:46 am:

This NRA member will most likely be voting for Quinn …

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 12:55 pm
I didn’t like this one.

While I realize that the goal was to work on Quinn’s base, I suspect that the impact will be to get gun owners who may have been OK on the sidelines motivated to turn out.

Quinn just whistled to people who are going to support Rauner. It is an unnecessary reminder of Quinn’s views on the matter, without a big corresponding upside.

This may help Rauner more than Quinn.

Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 1:23 pm
RNUG- I hear you. Most single issue voters have already made their choice but from what you have posted I know you aren’t one of those (neither am I .

Th ad is for its target audience. Rauner didn’t run his pro-choice and wouldn’t touch SSM ads don’t run down here either. Does anyone wonder why?

Comment by Roadiepig Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 1:27 pm
The issue is stale because it was overdone based on one commercial in 2010? Tell us Great Genius what the intervening events of Sandy Hook, UCSB, the Sikh temple, and Fort Hood 2.0 did to make the issue stale?

Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 2:05 pm
Only in Illinois would a scandal-plagued Democrat return to the dry well of banning America’s favorite rifle and other scary-looking black guns in a desperation move to appeal to his “base”.

Nationally, the so-called scary gun bans have been abandoned by big gun control for some time now. The support for banning guns is at a multi-generational nadir. It’s almost like Pat Quinn is stuck in the 1970s with bell-bottom jeans, long hair and wide ties.

Nevermind that these police patrol-type rifles Quinn seeks to take away from law-abiding Illinoisans are almost never used by Chicago’s law-ignoring criminals… kinda like Quinn almost never spends the night at the Governor’s mansion.

These guns are, however, used recreationally and for self-defense by hundreds of thousands of the state’s residents.

Quinn’s “vision” of concealed carry was over-ridden by what, 2/3rds or more of the General Assembly last year, wasn’t it?

Pat Quinn’s greatest accomplishment has been raising taxes and putting more Illinoisans on food stamps than into jobs.

It’s no wonder he’s stooped to kicking straw-dogs in his campaign.

The sad part is Rauner isn’t a whole lot better than Quinn on guns… and Rauner’s campaign hasn’t been awe inspiring.

I really look for a lot of gun owners to just sit this race out, which bodes well for Gov. Clueless Quinn.

John

Comment by John Boch Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 3:11 pm
“Quick question- how many NRA members will vote for Quinn? ”

As I alluded to in my previous post, the bigger question is “How many NRA members will care enough to vote for Rauner over Quinn when it comes to guns?”

I’m president of the Chicago White Sox of gun rights groups in Illinois and I’m not motivated to say much of anything nice about Rauner to our members other than “he can’t be worse than Quinn on guns”.

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement, if you know what I mean.

John

Comment by John Boch Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 3:18 pm
–Actually it’s a Red State, with a really big Blue city that can be overwhelming. Blue City, Purple County Suburbs, Pink Collars, and Red as Mars downstate. Working the shades is where it’s at now, right?–

Can you believe this guy? He’s the one who said Edgar wasn’t popular in the suburbs (Edgar outpolled Reagan).

Learn to count, dude.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 3:24 pm
–I’m president of the Chicago White Sox of gun rights groups in Illinois and I’m not motivated to say much of anything nice about Rauner to our members other than “he can’t be worse than Quinn on guns”.–

No, the White Sox have a storied history, a loyal following and have accomplished something in recent years.

Just keep the Sox out of your crazy, okay? What did they do to you?

Ever find all those guns you “lost,” John? Hope they didn’t end up in the wrong hands. As I’m sure you know, “lost” and “stolen” guns often wind up in the hands of gangbangers.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 3:31 pm
“The ad will play well with suburban women and City of Chicago residents - its a strong ad to counter the “no social agenda” claims of Rauner.”

It doesn’t play well with this City of Chicago resident who is also a Quinn supporter and an Illinois Rifle Association member which is an affiliate of the NRA. I don’t support Rauner but fair is fair, according to the Chicago Tribune yesterday Rauner’s position was that he: “Does not support an assault weapons ban, limits to high-capacity magazines or stricter background checks.”

Specifically this was a reference to the State Sen. Dan Kotowski bill which discussed semiautomatic rifles of specific designs that were in the bill designated “assault rifles” and clips over a specific capacity.

There is no semiautomatic rifle, as has been pointed out, that can shoot 350 rounds in 30 seconds. Even the Auto-Ordnance’s Semiautomatic Thompson 1927A-1 only holds a 50 round drum which is legal in Illinois and it can even be bought at Cabela’s. It would require pulling the trigger 350 times and changing the drum 6 times in 30 seconds. That seems impossible to me.

Comment by Rod Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 4:05 pm
This ad made up my mind about who to vote for Quinn is out. So sad his campaign sunk so low.

Comment by Bily Bear Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 4:50 pm
“Ever find all those guns you “lost,” John? ”

I sold ‘em to Mikey Pfleger.

As for the Sox, we have everything you cited them having except we don’t have a losing record this year.

Love,

John

Comment by John Boch Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 5:29 pm
== its stale because its based on a commercial from 2010 ==

Just like the early release ads.

== appealing to fear…using lies ==

Reminds me of how the GOP has — and in other states is — using the immigration issue.

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 5:47 pm
Good job Pat, you convinced me to get out and vote. For Bruce Rauner. At least he’s not spreading disinformation, fearmongering, pandering to the ignorant and uninformed, or creating failed “violence reduction programs.” Remind me how many of these “deadly military style assault weapons” are used to commit crimes (specifically murder) in Chicago, and in Illinois in general.

Comment by Jack Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 6:03 pm
Does anyone else cringe when they hear magazine clip? Which is it? Also if there is a rifle capable of shooting 350 rounds in seconds that is legal i want it. So far from reality I dont know where to start. Btw this was so low Rauner for sure gets my vote.

Comment by concerned individual Wednesday, Oct 8, 14 @ 9:35 pm
As a former infantryman in the Illinois Army National Guard I used an M4 Carbine on a regular basis while in training and while overseas. Overall this add is a complete load of garbage. The first thing I want to clear up is that the term, “assault weapon” is incorrect, there is literally no such thing as an assault weapon. Assault is an aggressive behaviour towards another person. A weapon is an object used to inflict great bodily harm or death upon another. Now the AR15 is a gas operated or piston driven, magazine fed, semi-automatic rifle. The military’s M4 Carbine is basically described as the same, the only difference is that it has a three round burst function which at even a cyclic raterof won’t blow threw 350 rounds in 30 seconds. There is literally nothing in either of these weapon systems field manuals that deem them as a assault weapon or reinforce the arguments that these liberals claim to be correct.So what are the practical uses for the AR15? Well first off, they’re extremely good rifles for marksmanship training and competitive shooting. They’re good for hunting varmit, which doesn’t really matter in Illinois because it’s illegal to hunt with a rifle in our state. They’re are good for self defense, but in extremely limited situations. It’s a high velocity rifle, so the AR15 is really not practical for your average self defense scenarios. The only reason people hate the AR15 is because of it’s appearance. All the arguments against the possession of these rifles are all emotion-based rather than fact based.

Also I would like to ask, why do people keep asking others why one needs an ar15 or anything at that? Well, who are we as human beings to question what someone else wants or needs? We are individuals and our business is ours alone and nobody else’s. As long as one is not hurting another, one should be free of judgement and critism.

My biggest issue with the entire gun debate is that both sides of the spectrum are failing to address the real problem and its not guns. It’s the fact that we live in a decaying society with no morals or values, a society that lacks good family structure, and a society that is to weak and affraid to embrace the gift of a true state of liberty. We would rather live under a growing totalitarian government that provides us with a mythical sense of security and a reason to be completely dependant on them. The fact of the matter is that if we want to fix a violent society we need to to start raising our children correctly, we need to reach out to people who are living those awful lives and offer them a helping hand. If safety is what you’re concerned with then you need to understand that safety is an individual responsibility, and you need to take the steps to ensure the safety of yourselves and your families, because the government will not and cannot ensure it. If we want to reduce violence we as people need to find rational solutions to this problem instead of turn to unreliable entities such as governments to Solve it. All they’re are ultimately going to do is put a bandaid on a cut that needs stitches. Meaning they’re going to find a temporary solution to a bigger problem.

Comment by strelok Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 10:44 pm
What clip can hold 350 rounds? I lie in cook county and love my guns, I thought this was a joke. They threw some big numbers to get the rest of the soccer mom politicians worked up. More law abiding citizens should have cheaper access to firearms to protect themselves from this tyrannical government.

Comment by Bronson Thursday, Oct 9, 14 @ 10:57 pm