Karl Rove: Only Way To Stop The Violence Is To Repeal Second Amendment

[Grand Torino]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/21/karl-rove-only-way-to-stop-the-violence-is-to-repeal-2nd-amendment/

 

 

When Chris Wallace asked Rove how we can, “stop the violence,” the long-time gun-rights advocate stated that we have made great strides as a nation in empathizing with the victims of these types of shootings, but the only way to guarantee they will stop is to “remove guns from society.”

WALLACE: How do we stop the violence?

ROVE: I wish I had an easy answer for that, but I don’t think there’s an easy answer

We saw an act of evil. Racist, bigoted evil, and to me the amazing thing is that it was met with grief and love. Think about how far we’ve come since 1963. The whole weight of the government throughout the South was to impede finding and holding and bringing to justice the men who perpetrated the [Birmingham] bombing.

And here, we saw an entire state, an entire community, an entire nation come together, grieving as one and united in the belief that this was an evil act, so we’ve come a long way.

Now maybe there’s some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough “oomph” to repeal the Second Amendment, that’s not going to happen.

Read more: 

[jgradyc]

I never liked this guy much even during the Bush Administration... and he's been worthless the last several years. Hey, Carl, go retire somewhere and shut up.

Edited June 25, 2015 by jgradyc

[EssOne]

...........................Hey, Carl, go retire somewhere and shut up.

Propositions truly deserving of consideration.

[cjohnson44546]

He's tried to backtrack on this… but the whole statement was stupid.  They should have asked him.. how does repealing the second amendment and banning guns remove them from the society?  Should maybe we ban drugs and murder too?

[Dolomite_supafly]

And as he left that interview he likely had a squad of armed men with guns. He is just like every other elitist in that the common man cannot have what they have. Just like our politicians that believe they are some how justified in believing they are better than anyone else.

[ehull20000]

Wow!  That is an impressive statement.   Thanks for posting this.  

[Caster]

I used to get worked up about stuff like this until I realized, I'm finally at that point in my life where I dont. First off, good luck to any of them that try to physically take them.
I've been ferreting stuff away for the last 20 years, since I got outta high school. I've got enough to get me by.
I'm gonna do what I want to do. I'M not a criminal and they can all kiss my ass. If they want to try, I'm okay with fighting about it. I doubt I will survive it.....but I KNOW they won't.


The folks who want to do things like this really think they have a handle on things. They think they know numbers. They know dick. There's how many guns out there already? Wrong, there's MUCH more. There's stuff hidden away coast to coast to the point of incalculability.

Take Knob Creek for example. For those of us who've been there, it's amazong right? Well, if those guys are willing to waste that much ammo and show off that many toys.....what do they have they ARENT willing to waste and DONT want to show off? ...and that's a drop in the bucket.

1000 years from the day they ban all guns on this soil they will STILL be unearthing enough to start small scale wars. I mean heck, they're still diggin up German caches in Russia left over from WWII and the U.S. private sector has more small arms and ammunition than half a dozen third reichs.

[mikegideon]

Y'all are missing his point. I will, and have, said the same thing. If you want to totally, for sure, eliminate mass shootings, then you gotta eliminate ALL the guns. Doesn't mean he was recommending that. Just stating a fact.

 

You can't eliminate all the guns (impossible), so stop with the half-ass petty gun control bull#### every time some nutball shoots the place up. I think THAT'S the point he was trying to make.

 

Eliminating 2A can't and WON'T happen in our lifetimes, and Rove knows that better than most.

Edited June 25, 2015 by mikegideon

[CommsNBombs]

Im with Mikegideon on this, anyone who thinks you can just repeal 2A (which you can't) and EVERYONE will just hand over their guns and ammo is litterally insane.

Everyone likes bending words to make things corroborate with their beliefs. We do it, Libs do it, the Pharisees did it and ISIS does it.

I can give two dookies. Im not giving my gear up. Gun control is a flawed concept.

When I was growing up in The Bronx in NYC I probably saw and more Class 3 and otherwise "illegal" stuff in NYC than I have seen in my time in here in TN/KY.

Anytime some nut job does something crazy the drive by media and all of the sheeple want to get rid of Confederate battle flags and machine guns.

Stupid. You can make a binary HE compound out of camping and pharmacuetical supplies. You can kill someone with an ax handle or your teeth or drown them.

As long as people feel like theyre "making a difference" they dont care who it affects


Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[Caster]

I don't want what I'm about to post to misunderstood.  I DO NOT want to see any more insane mass killings.  NO!

 

...but, the fact is, it's inevitable.  ...and again, don't misunderstand but I would really like to see the next nut that goes crazy, use a sword or hammer or something else.  It would be horrible and I would genuinely feel bad if it happens after me saying it but it might be what it takes to make people understand, its not the tool used to do the job....it's the whacko using to tool.

 

If some fool went crazy with a ball bat full of nails and couldn't be stopped until the cops arrive, will the want to ban ball bats? 

 

Mental illness needs the real discussion.  

Edited June 25, 2015 by Caster

[CommsNBombs]

I don't want what I'm about to post to misunderstood. I DO NOT want to see any more insane mass killings. NO!

...but, the fact is, it's inevitable. ...and again, don't misunderstand but I would really like to see the next nut that goes crazy, use a sword or hammer or something else. It would be horrible and I would genuinely feel bad if it happens after me saying it but it might be what it takes to make people understand, its not the tool used to do the job....it's the whacko using to tool.

Wish the drive by media saw it that way.

People have been killing people for time immemorial. Cain killed with a rock and we just so happened to escalate to thermonuclear tactical munitions.

Guns are just easy to demonize.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[bersaguy]

If I am not mistaken this issue was taken up in the SCOTUS a few years back and it was determined by the Court that the 2Nd Amendment will stand as written and will not be infringed upon. They also stated that they will not now of in the future hear any more cases pertaining to the 2nd Amendment period. So they can say all they want about taking away the guns but the SCOTUS says no so I just don't  see it happening in our lifetime..............jmho

[Caster]

I think it all stems from fear.  Fear that I am not so easily controlled.  A good solid rifle levels out the playing field and makes an individual [with NO training or logistical support]  VERY dangerous.  

 

"Tha Man" poops his pants at the thought of uncontrollable free thinkers that value liberty.  Many a Redcoat had brown knickers.  

Edited June 25, 2015 by Caster

[bersaguy]

I don't want what I'm about to post to misunderstood.  I DO NOT want to see any more insane mass killings.  NO!

 

...but, the fact is, it's inevitable.  ...and again, don't misunderstand but I would really like to see the next nut that goes crazy, use a sword or hammer or something else.  It would be horrible and I would genuinely feel bad if it happens after me saying it but it might be what it takes to make people understand, its not the tool used to do the job....it's the whacko using to tool.

 

If some fool went crazy with a ball bat full of nails and couldn't be stopped until the cops arrive, will the want to ban ball bats? 

 

Mental illness needs the real discussion.  

What I would like to see is some lunatic start to begin shooting up some place and a couple Sheep Dogs in the crowd with HCP's kill the SOB. If that would happen a few times it might make a difference. I know I am going to receive some flack about HCP's in Gun Free Zones breaking the law but who are they going to be most proud of when the smoke clears. The dead bad guy or the Sheep Dogs that prevented another mass killing?.......................jmho

[Caster]

Crazy's ain't crazy!!!  No nut job is gonna hit a hard target.  If the kind of people hellbent on killing really wanted to make "those responsible" pay, why not hit a courthouse or police station. Ohh no, they might shoot back before the coward gets a chance to off himself.  

[Oh Shoot]

I don't want what I'm about to post to misunderstood.  I DO NOT want to see any more insane mass killings.  NO!

 

...but, the fact is, it's inevitable.  ......

 

Seems to me just a matter of time before a few homegrown jihadis that don't much care whether they survive it or not (or real ones that just mosey across the border) set a new record body count shooting up a big church or synagogue here.

 

Among the softest of targets, especially in essentially gun free zone states, captive audience, perfect venue for the Islamic kill-em-all radical ideology, etc.

 

- OS

[Caster]

Yep.  I've been to a few concerts in the last few years and as my mind wanders with my eyes across the crowd, I am amazed at how easy it would be to slaughter people at a loud venue.  Take a good heavy metal concert for example.  So loud you have to text the person next to you just to communicate.  On the floor, people are cutting loose and having a great time, half of them are drunk, the other half probably stoned.  A person with a suppressed rifle sits in the upper deck in the shadows and starts laying waste to them.  Shoot several by the major exits first would clog up the works and give a moderately proficient shooter a good ten minutes.  Maybe more with a suppressor.  How many center mass hits can you get off from a semi auto rifle inside 50 yards in the span of ten minutes???

 

 

 

OR, some pipe fittings, cannon fuse and a couple pounds of pyrodex and just start lobbing them off in the thick of it.  

 

 

 

The last venue I went to I wasn't SUPPOSED to have a weapon but it wasn't posted and I made it through a pat down.  SERIOUSLY!!!  A physical pat down and I went right on it.  BUT, If I had of needed it and managed to defend myself from a lunatic, I'd be in jail right now, what would you bet?

Edited June 25, 2015 by Caster

[Oh Shoot]

Yep.  I've been to a few concerts in the last few years and as my mind wanders with my eyes across the crowd, I am amazed at how easy it would be to slaughter people at a loud venue.  Take a good heavy metal concert for example.  So loud you have to text the person next to you just to communicate.  On the floor, people are cutting loose and having a great time, half of them are drunk, the other half probably stoned.  A person with a suppressed rifle sits in the upper deck in the shadows and starts laying waste to them.  Shoot several by the major exits first would clog up the works and give a moderately proficient shooter a good ten minutes.  Maybe more with a suppressor.  How many center mass hits can you get off from a semi auto rifle inside 50 yards in the span of ten minutes???

 

Well, yeah, that's certainly doable for a single shooter with skill and cunning.

 

But I'm thinking more about 4-6 guys coming into several entrances at once and just blazing away with AKs or whatever in a 500+ church service. Even with just semi-auto spray and pray, that's gonna be a BIG number.

 

Even this heathen is in a church 6 times a year or so, and every time I think how unlikely my widdle 9mm pop gun would make much of a diff against such withering quick fire power, especially at distance.  Include any others also carrying too.

 

Course, with any sense in the planning, they'll pick a venue in Kali, NY, MD, NJ, etc where hardly anyone cept a cop or three might be packing so would minimize even that. Or even Charleston, SC, eh?

 

I also consider the high irony of my being snuffed in a church of all places! :)  And since I've never fit the middle of a bell curve in just about anything in my whole life, probably as likely as anything else!

 

- OS

Edited June 25, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[CommsNBombs]

Homegrown jihadis, sleeper/shadow/splinter cells, lone wolfs and nihilists are always a threat. Soft targets are everywhere.

 

If the mainstream, and Che-t-shirt-wearing-emo-save-the-whales-take-the-guns-basement-dwelling-felchers want to keep trying to ban guns, and do their stupid "All Lives Matter" cardboard displays let them at it.

 

I am telling you, all it takes is a few determined and reckless individuals to maintain fire superiority and a good covered and elevated position in a theater, church, temple, Central Park or the likes to let these idiots know : Gun free doesn't mean gun free.

 

Not that I wish that on anyone, but there are sick bastards in this world and it seems no one except the middle class cares to try to stop it. Anarchists, nihilists and lone-wolf-copycays roam our borders with impunity. It is not hard to find some goober on Armslist that just wants to offload his cheapo-ar15 at a bargain to some sketchy dude without asking to see any form of Military ID, HCP or otherwise.

 

The left will never understand that, they just care that their voters want more "gun control" so "Confederate Nazi Facist Right-Wingers" can't kill them or ambush their homosexual weddings that they proudly flaunt around.

[bersaguy]

Seems to me just a matter of time before a few homegrown jihadis that don't much care whether they survive it or not (or real ones that just mosey across the border) set a new record body count shooting up a big church or synagogue here.

 

Among the softest of targets, especially in essentially gun free zone states, captive audience, perfect venue for the Islamic kill-em-all radical ideology, etc.

 

- OS

I agree with you OS but I think Jihadis's think on a much larger scale like the Boston Bombers. I think they like IED's much better than guns for their attacks...................jmho

[Oh Shoot]

I agree with you OS but I think Jihadis's think on a much larger scale like the Boston Bombers. I think they like IED's much better than guns for their attacks...................jmho

 

Only killed 6 people, ya know. Not sure if that even gets you the full complement of virgins.

 

- OS

[Falcon1]

If I am not mistaken this issue was taken up in the SCOTUS a few years back and it was determined by the Court that the 2Nd Amendment will stand as written and will not be infringed upon. They also stated that they will not now of in the future hear any more cases pertaining to the 2nd Amendment period. So they can say all they want about taking away the guns but the SCOTUS says no so I just don't  see it happening in our lifetime..............jmho

 

Unfortunately, the two major decisions on the Second Amendment (Heller and McDonald) were 5-4, and could easily be "revisited" whenever four of the justices want to grant a rehearing.  Any sentiment on the court not to revisit any topic can change with each new justice appointment.  It took Plessy almost sixty years to be reversed, but it was reversed.  I hope you are right, but after today, I am certain of nothing....  :tinfoil:

[Oh Shoot]

If I am not mistaken this issue was taken up in the SCOTUS a few years back and it was determined by the Court that the 2Nd Amendment will stand as written and will not be infringed upon. They also stated that they will not now of in the future hear any more cases pertaining to the 2nd Amendment period. So they can say all they want about taking away the guns but the SCOTUS says no so I just don't  see it happening in our lifetime..............jmho

Unfortunately, the two major decisions on the Second Amendment (Heller and McDonald) were 5-4, and could easily be "revisited" whenever four of the justices want to grant a rehearing.  Any sentiment on the court not to revisit any topic can change with each new justice appointment.  It took Plessy almost sixty years to be reversed, but it was reversed.  I hope you are right, but after today, I am certain of nothing....  :tinfoil:

 

Yep, bit of a naive statement on Bersa's part I'm afraid.

 

Nothing SCOTUS related prevented the proposed new even tougher assault weapon ban in '13, (which turned into Manchin-Toomey)  from being passed -- otherwise it could never have even been proposed, eh?

 

And of course if SCOTUS refused to hear any cases stemming from such as claimed, either would have stood if passed.  Probably either would if they had passed and SCOTUS did hear a case stemming from either of them.

 

- OS

Edited June 25, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[gregintenn]

Guys, I'd ask you to reflect on Mr. Rove's statement here before you start mailing out checks to the GOP this fall. Think about it again in November when you are about to pull the lever for the GOP establishment "candidate that can win" the general election.

 

This is what you keep getting with the party hardliners. Personally, I'd rather have Hillary Clinton in office. At least we won't be surprised by her actions.

[cjohnson44546]

This is what you keep getting with the party hardliners. Personally, I'd rather have Hillary Clinton in office. At least we won't be surprised by her actions.

That's like choosing the person who will kill you for sure instead of the person who might kill you... just so you can be assured of the outcome.