Bullshit answer by Sen. Kelly Ayotte (NH) to Sandy Hook victim's daughter at town hall.

[RiffRandell]

Last edited Wed May 1, 2013, 07:29 AM - Edit history (1)

The daughter walks out after her "answer." Good for you Erica Lafferty! The senator's main focus was on "mental health" and had to throw in "she took a lot of heat" from her own party. Fuck you!

[SunSeeker]

1. Way to not answer the question, Ayotte.

She asked you why, when you met with Newtown victims families, you cited the "burden" on gun stores that background checks would cause, and did not find more important the burden on her mother who was gunned down. Instead, you babble on about how you wanted a bipartisan bill. FFS, the Toomey-Manchin background check bill was a bipartisan bill, you doublespeak asshole. And way to parrot the NRA talking point that background checks "wouldn't have solved it." No one measure is going to solve all gun violence, you tool.

[Robb]

2. Ayotte is under a lot of pressure. She's not well.

Good.

[SunSeeker]

15. Yes. Being dead inside is bad for her. nt

[madville]

3. What has been proposed that would have prevented it?

All these bullshit Senate bills would not have prevented the massacre, it's all poll straddling,NRA, gun-grabber political bullshit.

[SunSeeker]

4. The AWB and mag limit would have at a minimum kept the death toll down.

These were not "bullshit bills." The background check bill had 90% approval. As long as we are a democracy, what the majority wants is what matters. Gun trafficking is deadly, as is the gun show loophole. Trying to prevent needless deaths each year is not "political bullshit," nor is a gun fetish an uninfringable Constitutional right.

[LAGC]

5. Connecticut already has an AWB on their books, and mag limits wouldn't have mattered at all.

The perp had plenty of time to reload -- he could have brought a single-shot bolt-action rifle and still killed all those kids in as long as it took police to arrive.

And as you well know, the perp stole the guns making background checks moot.

[SunSeeker]

6. 11 kids escaped while he was changing mags.

If he had 10 round instead of 30 round mags, he would have had to change more times and more could have escaped. The cops got there in about 5 minutes. By that time, he sprayed 154 bullets. He could not have killed 26 people in 5 minutes with a single-shot bolt-action rifle. He didn't "steal" the guns, his mother bought the guns (including the AR he used), legally, so they could go shooting, thinking it would be good therapy for him.

But I am sure Ayotte appreciates the gungeoneers coming to her rescue here, especially after taking all that "heat" from her own party.

[eqfan592]

8. 11 kids escaped while changing mags?

Are you certain of this? Have a link for that? I'm sorry, but I find it very difficult to believe that this happened, unless he was deliberately taking his time changing mags at certain points.

And no, he couldn't have killed that many with a bolt action in that time frame. Unlikely anyway. Now, a bomb on the other hand....

[Justice]

11. yes 11 kids escaped while changing mags.

I read this.

The Arizona shooter was stopped by a an older woman while changing mags. The more chances to stop them the better.

[SunSeeker]

12. Yes.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20130430/NJNEWS/304300029/Newtown-families-lobby-Trenton-stricter-gun-control-laws

[davidn3600]

16. You still don't solve the problem

Your only goal in this appears to be not to prevent this type of incident, but to use it as an excuse to punish gun owners.

You can ban guns, ban magazines, increase background checks...that's all well and good. But it does nothing to address the problem that we have a psychopath out there looking for a way to kill a large number of people.

The Tsarnaev brothers are proof that not only can you get any gun you want illegally on the black market...but you can build bombs from instructions off the internet. No matter what laws you pass, no matter what rights you trample, it doesn't take much for a psycho to cause mass mayhem.

[SunSeeker]

18. No one measure is going to solve all gun violence--but they all help.

The fact that some people will continue to break laws is not a reason to not have laws. People run stop signs but we still have stop signs. Ayotte is a LEGISLATOR who is supposed to make LAWS. If she thinks we shouldn't pass laws because people will violate them, then she is in the wrong business.

No one is trying to "punish" gun owners. We're just trying to save lives. Making it harder for psychos to get weapons and limiting the types of weapons available saves lives. Australia did it. We can do it too.

And Ayotte has punished herself. Remember Ayotte? She's what this thread is (was) about.

Sigh. Another gungeoneer-hijacked thread...

[Brainstormy]

26. thank you, Sunseeker, we MUST keep repeating that:

The fact that some people will continue to break laws is not a reason to not have laws.

The fact that some people will continue to break laws is not a reason to not have laws.

The fact that some people will continue to break laws is not a reason to not have laws.

This is the inescapable logic that they just don't get!

[RiffRandell]

28. Exactly.

I'm smart enough to know new gun laws won't prevent all violent acts, but we (hey that includes you congress assholes) should at least fucking try!

[CreekDog]

20. the important thing is that you not only don't want to solve the problem, you don't want to try

that's the important thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. People will drive through stop sights

So let's get rid of them!

[LAGC]

17. I notice you said nothing about the fact that Connecticut already had an AWB on the books.

Did a lot of good didn't it?

As for mag limits, all it would do is make these mass-shooters conserve their ammo.

In Lanza's case, he shot each kid dozens of times. Total overkill.

It doesn't take much imagination to picture a gunman lining up kids neatly in a row and firing a single shot to the head to down the whole line.

And how would have background checks stopped Lanza from acquiring his weapons? Even if he was put on the prohibited list, he never bought any of the guns himself anyway, he stole them from his mother after shooting her in her sleep.

I'm all for hearing solutions that might actually work, but "feel good" measures aren't going to cut it.

[SunSeeker]

19. We need a nationwide AWB. But this thread is about Ayotte's bc vote.

There have been plenty of other threads that have discussed why CT's AWB was inadequate and the need for a nationwide AWB.

This thread is about Ayotte's shameful attempt to justify her background check vote to a Newtown victim's daughter.

[Gravitycollapse]

7. You honestly think a bolt-action rifle would be as deadly in that instance?

[eqfan592]

9. Unlikely. But a bomb?

Or hell, even a pump action shotgun would have likely been similarly devastating.

[Gravitycollapse]

10. What is your point?

[madville]

22. All ineffective, worthless laws

It just irks me that people actually think the AWB and high capacity magazine bans actual prohibit or prevent people from having/legally obtaining assault-type weapons or high capacity mags. They don't, loopholes are purposely built in making the laws impotent.

The latest background check proposal was exactly the same type of bill, more a PR campaign with a couple of very narrow changes that would be easily circumvented.

Everyone blowing smoke up each others' asses, whipping their bases into a frenzy over laws that don't anything.

It's all politics and money, like always.

[SunSeeker]

27. These laws worked in Australia.

Australia has not had a mass shooting since their AWB. Of course, if we let the NRA riddle tha law with all sorts of loopholes, it will not be as effective.

Can't you find another thread to fight for assault rifles?

[baldguy]

23. What do you propose that would have, in your opinion?

Other than strip-searching everyone, exposing each individuals mental heath history to public scrutiny, and (the ever-popular RW fantasy) allowing every RW gun weirdo to carry a concealed weapon nationwide?

We never really have ever heard any realistic ideas from the RW gun weirdo community to reduce gun violence.

The fact is that any of the proposals: universal background checks, limiting the size of magazines, and an assault weapons ban, are realistic & WOULD reduce the number of these horrific civilian massacres - which are becoming all to regular - and reduce the number of normal, everyday incidents of gun violence.

[madville]

24. I agree

Getting rid of high capacity magazines and assault weapons would reduce incidents where they are used. The AWB and hi-cap bans as we know them don't do that, all of that stuff is/was still readily available.

The background check bill that was recently defeated was not a universal background check bill, private sales would have still been perfectly legal in states that allow it, which is most.

I'm not debating that bans or strict measures won't have an impact. I'm just saying these weak, ineffective, loophole filled laws are mainly political PR stunts and used as wedge issues to generate revenue and get the voting bases all pissed off.

[Cha]

14. It was sociopathic bullshit.

[jessie04]

21. Damn....shes so spineless.

Pound her every time she gives a open forum.