Scarborough: Republicans that filibuster gun control ‘put rapists’ rights over parents’ rights

Sensationalism is key to the gun grabbing agenda, and here we have a Republican using more sensationalist remarks to try and band a select minority together by using ridiculous analogies.

Scarborough said such a filibuster would be an example of the GOP putting “rapists’ rights ahead over parents’ rights.”

In this statement, Scarborough believes that filibustering 2nd amendment infringement will put "rapists" rights ahead of "parent rights" Now, of course criminals will get their hands on a gun, and commit a crime, but these statistics I have here show that in 2001, only 11% of the rape crimes involved a weapon, and only 3% used a gun

In 2001, 11% of rapes involved the use of a weapon — 3% used a gun, 6% used a knife, and 2 % used another form of weapon.

84% of victims reported the use of physical force only.

www.rainn.org...

So the talking heads decided to use the word "rape" in an analogy against guns, because the word "Rape" is associated with a horrific crime, even though a small percentage of cases involved a firearm.

“We got an issue that is a 92-7 [percent] issue and I can’t believe that Republicans, first of all, aren’t going to support it, but secondly won’t let background checks against rapists, people who have committed manslaughter in the past, people with mental illness, dangerous mental illness — I can’t believe those Republicans are going to allow the entire Republican Party to be the party that basically put rapists’ rights over parents’ rights to keep their kids safe when they go to school,” he continued.

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures, despite the uptick in gun and ammo sales, they will continue to push the fairy tale that almost the entire population wants to get rid of firearms, or limit our 2nd Amendment rights. Again, they are defending the background check system, despite the fact that there is already a system in place, but states do not report accurately on their mental health cases.

Scarborough went through a list of recent gun tragedies and warned Republicans that they would be on the wrong side of history if they continue to oppose new firearm regulations, especially if another tragedy takes place.

He makes a bold claim, that senators who decide to filibuster this new legislation, are on the wrong side of history. No scarborough, I think you're on the wrong side of history, considering all of the draconian control methods coming down the pipeline. These talking heads will say and do anything to get a reaction, even if it means they need to sensationalize their facts.

Look in the recent past, kids shot up in an Oregon mall. Teenagers shot and killed while they’re watching a movie in Aurora, Colo. A grandmother shot while worshipping God up in Minnesota. And then, of course, these first graders dismembered by all of the bullets that were shot at them in rapid succession.”

Lets not talk about the lack of security at these places, and the fact that they were gun free zones. So the sentence in bold is another knee jerk comment, with skewed facts to make people just shut down and be compliant. I'm sick of these politicians taking a tragedy, twisting the facts, and stomping on our rights. It's the Anti-American media that ultimately controls the masses, and I just hope that the filibuster goes down without a hitch, because no matter how much they claim that new laws will stop shootings, I will continue to fight against that fallacy stance.

Scarborough went on to assure his Republican viewers that these background checks won’t lead to some sort of national registry, which had been one of the primary concerns of a so-called universal background check requirement to purchase a firearm.

Right, Right... nothing to worry about folks, the TV said that background checks won't lead to a national registry. There you have it, it's not happening, you are a conspiracy theorist, and a rapist murderer if you defend the constitution.

DailyCaller

John McCain Urges Republicans Not To Filibuster Gun Control

McCain said that filibusters silence the crucial discussions that take place around legislation.

"Why not take it up and amend it and debate? The American people would profit from it. I don’t understand why United States senators want to block debate when the leader has said we can have amendments," he said.

Because McCain, by the time it gets passed, it will be shoved so deep into a file drawer that nobody will find it and be able to amend it. Why amend draconian laws when you can stop them from even being passed? He says Americans will profit from gun control, but I fail to see how, considering it will open the public up to further victimization.

As always, I'd like you guys to weigh in on the subject. I know there is a lot of debate on gun control, but it's an important debate, and I refuse to go silent on the issue. Expect more from me as this assault on the 2nd continues.

TLDR: Gun Rights Do Not = Rapist Rights.

huffpost

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures

I am so sick of people citing that statistic its a lie biggest reason it is a lie is because that implies everyone in this country are voters, fact is less than a 3rd even vote

Scarborough has it wrong those who are pushing gun control are putting rapists over parents rights.

The rapist is the US Federal Government because they are forcing their way in to our homes doing whatever the hell they want regardless.

This why our country is on such an out of control downward spiral. Ludicrous fear-mongering used to further political agendas. Coming from every part of the Govt. and both parties.

He should have just went full stupid mode and said "If we don't ban all firearms, terrorists will come to America and rape our children" Which is pretty much what they're trying to say. Just give them time, they'll get there, someone will say it.

Originally posted by neo96

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures

I am so sick of people citing that statistic its a lie biggest reason it is a lie is because that implies everyone in this country are voters, fact is less than a 3rd even vote

Scarborough has it wrong those who are pushing gun control are putting rapists over parents rights.

The rapist is the US Federal Government because they are forcing their way in to our homes doing whatever the hell they want regardless.

Exactly, if you ban, or limit people's freedoms to access and carry firearms you're opening the door for the criminals. The stats I listed said 84% of victims of a rape crime were physically assaulted without a weapon.. so how is banning guns going to stop the 84% of crimes that happened without one?

As far as them claiming that almost the entire population of the US is for gun control, I'm with you on that statement... it's complete BS, and they know it.. especially with record gun sales, and nationwide ammo shortages? Yeah.... I believe 97% of people wanna limit or ban the 2nd.. sure buddy.. geez

reply to post by eXia7


Gun laws passed don't do anything they are just "feel good" legislation to make their supporters "think" they actually "care" about them.

They don't the only thing they care about is their political agendas, and what keeps them in power.

Scarborough went on to assure his Republican viewers that these background checks won’t lead to some sort of national registry, which had been one of the primary concerns of a so-called universal background check requirement to purchase a firearm.

as for this statement, I would encourage Mr. Scarborough to read up on my thread about: ATF Seeks 'Massive' Database of Personal Info: 'Assets, Relatives, Associates and More'

Now why would the ATF be calling for an extended database on US citizens... other than planned registry?

reply to post by eXia7


wow this might be one of the more insane things ive seen in a while....and on to the statistics well they polled law enforcement and this is what they had to say out of 15,000 of them www.businesswire.com...

86 percent feel the currently proposed legislation would have no effect or a negative effect on improving officer safety Similarly, 92 percent feel that banning semi-automatic firearms, or “assault weapons,” would have no effect or a negative effect on reducing violent crime Demonstrating the opinion that the best way to combat gun crime is through harsher punishment, 91 percent said the use of a firearm while perpetrating a crime should lead to a stiff, mandatory sentence with no plea bargains. Likewise, 59 percent believe increasing punishment severity for unlicensed dealers would reduce crime Respondents were more split on background checks, with 31 percent agreeing that mental health background checks in all gun sales would help reduce mass shootings, while 45 percent disagreed 71 percent support law enforcement leaders who have publicly refused to enforce more restrictive gun laws within their jurisdictions 82 percent believe gun buyback or turn-in programs are ineffective in reducing the level of gun violence 91 percent support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or have not been deemed psychologically incapable Likewise, 80 percent feel that legally-armed citizens would likely have reduced the number of casualties in recent mass shooting incidents 38 percent believe the biggest cause of gun violence in the United States is the “decline in parenting and family values”. This was trailed by “overly lax parole and short sentencing standards” at 15 percent and “pop culture influence” (e.g., violent movies and video games) at 14 percent

kinda odd that this lawmaker equates more guns with more rapes.....as i think a good deal of rapist get shot by armed women from time to time,a girl in my state a few months ago had some males break into her house she was 14 i think and she called 911 and they were 20ish minutes out so when the criminals kicked in her door and tried to grab her she shot one of them in the balls with a 20 gauge i think it was and the other one ran off for his life so i dont know what world this politicians living in but in my world rapists get stopped by armed women not whistles or phone calls

reply to post by eXia7


Orwell warned us camera's everywhere,cell phone tracking,vehicle tracking,financial tracking, Patriot Act powers expanded,NDAA, gun tracking,"associate" tracking.

Awe that is just Big brother looking out for us "helpless" people !!!!

They are going to "Save" us from all the baddies both foreign and domestic Just wonder who is gonna "save" us from the people who are supposedly "looking" out for us.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by eXia7

 

Orwell warned us camera's everywhere,cell phone tracking,vehicle tracking,financial tracking, Patriot Act powers expanded,NDAA, gun tracking,"associate" tracking.

Awe that is just Big brother looking out for us "helpless" people !!!!

They are going to "Save" us from all the baddies both foreign and domestic Just wonder who is gonna "save" us from the people who are supposedly "looking" out for us.

edit on 8-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Yeah and they have the All Star Nutty Lineup: McCain, Frankenstein, Mark Kelly, Scarborough, Obama

These are you major players in perpetuating control... Luckily we have an All Star team of our own, and they definitely do their part in standing up for We the people.. filibuster vs control nutters, expect some news this week as it's part of the talking points on the agenda.

I agree that Scarborough's remarks are tasteless, but I don't believe that 90%+ agreeing we need stricter gun controls should matter at all.

The constitution was very specific in that the rights we are granted by our creator, or whatever, is not at the whim of mob rule or popular opinion.

Our rights are our rights and no government action or community "opinion" can infringe on those rights.

For example, let's say that 90% of the people believe we should not allow all progressives to talk in public....ever. Should we take away the rights of progressives to free speech just because the majority wants to?

No, of course not.

Mob rule or majority rule is very dangerous and reflects the emotional knee-jerk reactions of most people....not the common sense approach laid out in the constitution.

www.inquisitr.com... well i did find this so perhaps that legislator is talking about how this "mayor against guns" used one to threaten and coerce him into sex from a 20 year old male who he lured to his house and plied with drink.... but some how i dont think he would want to draw attention to the screw up

Marcus Hook, PA — A member of the Michael Bloomberg-sponsored gun control organization “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” has been arrested and charged in connection with a handgun incident at his home. James Schiliro, a.k.a. Jay Schiliro, the mayor of Marcus Hook, a small town in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, faces charges of official oppression, reckless endangerment, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, and furnishing a minor with alcohol. He surrendered to authorities on Thursday morning, and his attorney declared that “we intend to fight these charges.” Schiliro, 38, allegedly ordered a local police officer to bring a 20-year-old male friend to his home, where the mayor plied him with alcohol, and made sexual advances which the man refused. Schiliro allegedly brandished several handguns and fired one of them into the floor in an apparent attempt to intimidate the young man, who reportedly was in fear of his life. Read more at www.inquisitr.com...

michellemalkin.com...

note that minor in this case refers to being under 21 not under 18

reply to post by sheepslayer247

but I don't believe that 90%+ agreeing we need stricter gun controls should matter at all.

When they use that stat as a justification YES it should, and does matter laws based in deception is exactly why we do have that constitution.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I agree that Scarborough's remarks are tasteless, but I don't believe that 90%+ agreeing we need stricter gun controls should matter at all.

The constitution was very specific in that the rights we are granted by our creator, or whatever, is not at the whim of mob rule or popular opinion.

Our rights are our rights and no government action or community "opinion" can infringe on those rights.

For example, let's say that 90% of the people believe we should not allow all progressives to talk in public....ever. Should we take away the rights of progressives to free speech just because the majority wants to?

No, of course not.

Mob rule or majority rule is very dangerous and reflects the emotional knee-jerk reactions of most people....not the common sense approach laid out in the constitution.

I agree, it seems that society has formed the mob mentality, and follow whatever is cool. Every human being has a right to self defense, be it from a random criminal, or a rogue government. That right should not be limited or nullified at any cost.. What we have now, is a complacent society that believes somebody will protect them in a situation, when that may not be the case.

The sad thing is, there are people who would rather let a criminal victimize them rather than defend themselves, and that's scary.. how does a person just shut down and not care if they defend themselves to live and fight another day.. I guess these are the type of people who have given up all hope and operate their day to day lives on auto pilot.

The morning shmoe is a big government leftist.
Just because he says he is a republican doesn't make it so.

We are losing 600,000 people from the workforce every month and these douchbags are still talking about gun control.

Originally posted by eXia7

“We got an issue that is a 92-7 [percent] issue and I can’t believe that Republicans, first of all, aren’t going to support it, but secondly won’t let background checks against rapists, people who have committed manslaughter in the past, people with mental illness, dangerous mental illness — I can’t believe those Republicans are going to allow the entire Republican Party to be the party that basically put rapists’ rights over parents’ rights to keep their kids safe when they go to school,” he continued.

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures, despite the uptick in gun and ammo sales, they will continue to push the fairy tale that almost the entire population wants to get rid of firearms, or limit our 2nd Amendment rights.

You seem VERY confused.

The 92% to 7% number reflects support for BACKGROUND CHECKS....NOT "the entire population wants to get rid of firearms"

Example: I own multiple firearms AND I want background checks.

Scarborough certainly can and often is a duffus, but his point is that clearly 97% of the population wants someone to check to see if someone is a criminal, rapist or whacko before they are sold a gun.

Ya know who else was part of that 92% who wanted universal background checks?

“We think it’s reasonable to provide mandatory instant background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere, for anyone,” NRA head Wayne LaPierre said in May 1999, shortly after the shooting at Columbine.

reply to post by Indigo5

The 92% to 7% number reflects support for BACKGROUND CHECKS.

BS tell me how many people "support" begging the government permission to own a gun?

Since that is what a background check is everyone has been found guilty, and have to prove their innocence each,and every time they buy a weapon.92% of this country support that?

Most people don't. still doesn't change the fact as already stated

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by eXia7

“We got an issue that is a 92-7 [percent] issue and I can’t believe that Republicans, first of all, aren’t going to support it, but secondly won’t let background checks against rapists, people who have committed manslaughter in the past, people with mental illness, dangerous mental illness — I can’t believe those Republicans are going to allow the entire Republican Party to be the party that basically put rapists’ rights over parents’ rights to keep their kids safe when they go to school,” he continued.

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures, despite the uptick in gun and ammo sales, they will continue to push the fairy tale that almost the entire population wants to get rid of firearms, or limit our 2nd Amendment rights.

You seem VERY confused.

The 92% to 7% number reflects support for BACKGROUND CHECKS....NOT "the entire population wants to get rid of firearms"

Example: I own multiple firearms AND I want background checks.

Scarborough certainly can and often is a duffus, but his point is that clearly 97% of the population wants someone to check to see if someone is a criminal, rapist or whacko before they are sold a gun.

Ya know who else was part of that 92% who wanted universal background checks?

“We think it’s reasonable to provide mandatory instant background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere, for anyone,” NRA head Wayne LaPierre said in May 1999, shortly after the shooting at Columbine.

edit on 8-4-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

Noted, perhaps I didn't quite read through that part enough. As far as background checks, it already happens.. daily, but if states don't report accurately on the various figures required, how can laws for extended background checks help if they don't already comply with current laws?

so 97% approve of universal background checks etc*

Today’s level of 47% for making gun laws more stringent is the lowest it has been since April of last year (39%). The endorsement of the status quo (39%) is likewise the highest it has been since the same point in time. Eleven years ago, the split was 56/30 in favor of tougher gun laws — and that was while the federal assault-weapons ban was still in place.

So approval of new gun control measures have fallen... that is if you take polls seriously.
hotair.com...

Also, out of the 92% you claim support it, this poll shows that even though they support it, they have concerns.

By a 48%-38% margin, voters say that the government could use the information from universal background checks to confiscate legally-owned guns. And gun owners believe 53%-34% that the checks could lead to confiscation of legal guns. There's also a partisan divide on the question, with 61% of Republicans and 51% of independents, and only 32% of Democrats, expecting confiscations

So 48% of voters believe that an extended background check system could lead to confiscation, and 53% of gun owners believe it could lead to future confiscation.

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...

Originally posted by neo96

A figure of roughly 92-97% apparently support new gun control measures

I am so sick of people citing that statistic its a lie biggest reason it is a lie is because that implies everyone in this country are voters, fact is less than a 3rd even vote

They dont care that some of us know its a lie just so they can get the dumb suckers to go for it. Which amounts to making a constitutional amendment null and void buy stacking laws on top of it untill it cant be seen anymore.

Now the effort to "protect children" was not enough and has left its moorings to now make gun owners and 2nd amendment constitutionalist part and parcel to rape in addition to hating children.

That type of talk doesn't get anything done. I swear we have 3 year old children that have better political skill than these jokers in both Government and journalism. It is extreme all the time. Reminds me of talking to my brother (of a different political view of the world):

Bro: Government should handle X
Me: They shouldn't because of Y and Z
Bro: You are for killing [insert: children, babies, old people, rapist, etc, etc]

One day we will grow up I suppose.