Ron

Print media is dying... Why keep it on life support with tax payer funds? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

If guns cause violent crime, and armed citizens are *not* a deterrent.... Why do we have shooting sprees in unarmed zones like schools and why don't we have shooting sprees at gunshows? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Those who have arguments provide facts, along with conclusions. Those who have none, provide insults. Those who genuinely grasp the truth of something are never tempted to hurl insults Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D. Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong. Jacques Rousseau (1712 - 1778) "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Yes, you do not get the reasoning. It could have been a error in my message, so lets try again. A CRIMINAL is not going to not kill someone due to a law saying he can't use that tool to do it. If he is willing to murder someone, he is not going to care that the tool is illegal. That is simple logic. Because you have not really shown how guns CAUSE violent crime. Study after study has shown that it is not the case. The AWB banned weapons that were used in less than 1-6% of crimes (according to the DOJ).... So why ban them if they were not the problem? So, the AWB banned a whole bunch of evil looking weapons that were not being used in crimes and had NO impact on crime rates. All it did was make it difficult for a law abiding citizen to own one... Criminals didn't pay attention to the ban. It is a perfect example of a stupid law that banned something that was not the problem and did nothing other than make people feel good. It would be like making it a crime for a convicted violent criminal to own a firearm... Wait, that is already true! So if a criminal is going to ignore the law that says they are not allowed to even own a firearm... What makes you think they will follow a law that says they are not allowed a TYPE of firearm? Care to tell me how many people have been killed by LEGAL full auto machine guns since 1934? Your posting on this topic proves otherwise. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Quoted for truth. The problem is anti gun people want to create rules that they think SOUND good, but will do nothing. Quade's example of "to limit the total kinetic energy output by the device over a certain period of time" What good is that going to do? A criminal is not going to suddenly turn in his AK47 since it is no longer legal. All this kind of rule does is punish a law abiding citizen while making anti-gun people FEEL better. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No offense, but this shows you don't know much about firearms. NO ONE wants weapons that are dangerous to the user to be out there.... But much like parachuting would you also support approved lists of main canopy's that may be jumped in the US? Would you support it knowing that many of the smaller canopy company's would not be able to submit to the testing and would just not sell the product. This shows it is not really about safety, otherwise RIFLES would also be listed. Also things like finish matter... If the blued one is on the list and the chrome one is not... then you can't buy the chrome one. And if the model was certified to be safe, but does not pay the annual 200 dollar fee, then they are dropped off the list.... there is no further testing. So, how does a "safe" pistol on the list suddenly become "unsafe" just because they didn't pay the 200 bucks? Can you tell me the difference between a machine gun and a full auto? I wish you supported the 2nd like you support the 1st. How many people have been killed by a legally owned Full Auto weapon since 1934? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The poll might be, but the ARTICLE was on a poll that does not change. Maybe you should actually read the article? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The link says something else. Might want to check your source again. Mike Huckabee was the clear winner, with 29 percent of the vote. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin: 12 percent (tie) Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: 12 percent (tie) Indiana Rep. Mike Pence: 11 percent Other choices in the poll were House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Texas Rep. Ron Paul and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. (Source: CNN) Huckabee won the straw poll Saturday, grabbing nearly 29 percent of the vote. Romney, Pawlenty, Palin and Pence each won roughly 12 percent of the 597 votes cast. You can try to claim some internet poll means anything (and I am sure you will) but your article says something other than your post. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

From your article: "at the Values Voter Summit in Washington" "religious conservatives" Your own source puts Palin in a three way tie. Did you even read your own link? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Isn't that a racist type comment? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Don't let the door knob hit you. Mods making personal attacks... NICE! "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And if it does not pass, what country will you flee to get it? And why have you not already gone? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nonsense, the CRA REQUIRED banks to loan to areas where people could not qualify under normal methods. When you put a requirement out and people create something to meet it... It DID create the new programs. I don't know how much simpler that could be. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The requirement was to give loans in areas. Those areas could not get regular loans hence the CRA in the first place. Since they didn't exist, the data says you are wrong. No, actually it does not. Sure, PM them to me.... Denying it was a factor is conveniently partisan, but isn't accurate either. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I know the definition.... But even with demand, without the CRA they WOULD not have existed. You can want all day, but until the product is available you can't get it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No, but your interpretation of the data is incomplete IMO. The CRA allowed the higher risk loans. That is a fact. No CRA, no high risk loans. Your opinion, others disagree Including the SanFran Fed. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

But the fact they didn't exist before the CRA DOES say something. I think that the very fact that they were created after the CRA *IS* important. You can disagree... I guess this discussion is done. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Before the CRA those loans did not exist. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Well none of them will just get up, load themselves up and go out and kill. So some might say "E". But I tend to trust people that are not criminals to have guns. Only one of the guns listed has a punishment of unregistered ownership of 250k and up to 10 years in prison. Now, I personally would be more afraid of the rifle with a point target range of 1200m. (A????) "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Id rather face an Uzi (and THAT Uzi in particular since it does not have a barrel, thus is inop) than a regular hunting rifle or shotgun. An Uzi pistol has an effective range of about 50m, a standard hunting rifle, Win700 in 30, is 800m, 600m for a point target.... He can hit you without you knowing he was shooting at you. A guy with a shotgun doesn't have to be that good of a shot. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Can I vote? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

From the links I provided: http://www.occ.treas.gov/cra/excel.htm It mentions "Innovative Lending Products"... Such as: "The Hawley bank started selling residential real estate mortgages to the secondary market earlier than most community banks and their 30-year loans are underwritten to Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) standards. However, the bank also offers and retains residential loans with flexible terms, including three-year and five-year balloons and adjustable-rate mortgages." And the CRS created a demand for higher risk loans... Countrywide and others used the CRA to sell these higher risk loans to banks. Loan demand went up and banks created crazy methods to finance people... to include ARMS and lowering requirements. The SanFran Fed seems to think that the CRA created a demand for low income lending and helped create the crazy lending options.... I'll side with the Fed, no offense. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

JCD thanks for bringing an interesting discussion... This is really not the place for it but: CRA encouraged "predatory lending." http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=uconn_wps Kathleen C. Engel and Patricia A. McCoy noted that : 1. banks could receive CRA credit by lending or brokering loans in lower-income areas that would be considered a risk for ordinary lending practices. 2. CRA regulated banks may also inadvertently facilitate these lending practices by financing lenders. 3. CRA regulations, as then administered and carried out by Fannie Mae and Freddie MAC, did not penalize banks that engaged in these lending practices. Ron Paul who is on the United States House Committee on Financial Services said that it was forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks. Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton said that CRA banks made one out of every four subprime mortgages. Check out this: http://www.occ.treas.gov/cra/excel.htm It mentions "Innovative Lending Products"... Such as: "The Hawley bank started selling residential real estate mortgages to the secondary market earlier than most community banks and their 30-year loans are underwritten to Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) standards. However, the bank also offers and retains residential loans with flexible terms, including three-year and five-year balloons and adjustable-rate mortgages." More so the CRS helped create the demand for low income mortgages... CountryWide marketed its loans directly to banks as a way for them to meet CRA obligations. Theres more of course... To meet their goals, the two mortgage giants enlisted large lenders—including nonbanks, which weren’t covered by the CRA—into the effort. Freddie Mac began an “alternative qualifying” program with the Sears Mortgage Corporation that let a borrower qualify for a loan with a monthly payment as high as 50 percent of his income Tell the SanFran Fed that it had nothing to do with it... "To re-iterate: the San Francisco Fed is explaining how the changes to the CRA and its enforcement increased low income lending. Much of that increase was accomplished by lowering lending standards." http://www.businessinsider.com/san-francisco-fed-explains-why-the-cra-became-much-more-dangerous-2009-6 "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I hope someday we reach a point where people don't feel the need to continue to point out when others use race in an example as a way to try to claim the person is racist. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

More prime examples: Face it, you just can't help doing it. They *are* in context... you HAVE to insult people for some reason... Again your ACTIONS do not match your words. Community Reinvestment Act Clinton signed NAFTA Sure http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Notice it is still going negative? Check the attachment... Notice it has jumped up like a rocket under Obama? And from CBS http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/03/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5209497.shtml "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334