Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (598081)	1/14/2011 7:01:21 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574018

I doubt he would know how often. Its not like the bill is limited to a handful of people. If Obama comes in you'll know it, you'll know it before hand when you are tossed out, or if they are ok with you being there carefully checked by the secret service, and even if somehow that didn't happen I'm sure everyone posting here would recognize him. But the bill covers not just the president, and the vice president, but all members of congress (would you really recognize all 535 on sight?), cabinet members (would you recognize even half of them in a middle of a crowd when you had no reason to pay any special attention to them), and federal judges (would you recognize more than one or two besides those on the supreme court?). The bill would "protect" (in quotes because it really protects no one) almost four thousand people. Few would recognize more than a few dozen out of those thousands, many would only recognize a handful. And remember you don't even have to be close to them, or able to see them. The standard is a thousand feet. You could be asleep in your bed, with your gun locked up in a safe, and the ammo locked in a separate safe, and he drives down a street near you, and you would have a gun within 1000 feet of a "senior official". Some federal judge could drive through a densely populated city, and millions of people would be in the area where they are not allowed to have guns, possibly without any of them knowing it. If you wanted to ban guns completely, it would be a very foolish idea, but at least with certain (false) assumptions it would make some sort of sense. This proposed law is nonsense all the way around, even if you buy in to a lot of the gun grabbers ideas. I don't know if King is just grandstanding, or if he is a total fool, or both, but if I was in his district he would have to be running against someone really horrible for him to get my vote, and only then if I thought it would be a close election. This is one of the most ridiculous proposals I've seen in my lifetime, and considering some of the proposed laws that pop up every now and then, that's really saying something.

To: tejek who wrote (598081)	1/14/2011 7:05:03 PM
From: d[-_-]b	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574018

Seriously.....how many times have you walked into a restaurant....sat down with your concealed weapon and a politician was in the place? Are you suggesting politicians all wear safety orange vests so we know who they are? As far the restaurant goes - what if I'm there first?