Liam Neeson, legendary Irish actor and star of such films as Taken and Non-Stop, does not identify with the hardcore, gun-toting action heroes he so often portrays.

"I am totally for gun control in the U.S.," Neeson said in an interview with The Independent. "The population of America is roughly 300 million and there are 300 million guns in this country, which is terrifying."

Neeson criticized the National Rifle Association's response to the 2012 shooting in Newton, Connecticut, which the actor summarized as, "If that teacher had been armed..."

"It's crazy," Neeson said. "I'll give Britain its dues, when they had the Dunblane massacre in Scotland, within 24 hours the gun laws were changed so you could not have a handgun."
Neeson became an official U.S. citizen five years ago. He says of the Constitution: "It is the right to bear arms which is the problem. I think if the Founding Fathers knew what was happening they would be turning in their graves with embarrassment at how that law has been interpreted."


terror firng? well, yeah?

If he doesn't like our Constitution he should get the hell out. Let him go back to where he's "comfortable" with oppressive laws. I think the British guns laws suck and I wouldn't live there or even attempt to change them.
I for one and sick and tired of these foreigners coming over here and criticizing our Constitution. None of us invited them to come here.
Jim

He's not even American..so he is cordially invited to go F himself. Should be easy for a person that can walk around with his head up his ass.. Go back to Ireland and flap his gums there. But He's no True Irishman either...he's forgetting centuries of British Opression when he praises them.

eye

yeah, but...is there anything he says above that has any merit?

like, we now have one gun for every person in this country...is that ok by you, or do you think that might be too many? and, then consider that if the 300 million figure is accurate, then it is remarkable that the misuse of guns in the country is so very low. even at one percent misuse, that would be 3 million incidents of misuse of firearms? does anybody know the actual figure? i suspect it is much less than one percent.

and, what about the original intent of the second amendment? did the founder fathers really want there to be a firearm for every hand, so to speak? or did that really intend for us to possess firearms necessary for self defense against enemies, foreign and domestic? i suspect it is the latter...

and, for those who berate neeson for being a recent imigrant, shame on you. we are all imigrants, or desendents of imigrants here...

They intended us to have firearms to protect person and property from tyranny, criminals, rioters, invasion and Indians. The Indians are not a threat but the others are still a possibility.

SCOTUS has ruled that the right is a personal right. That is the final word until those that believe as you do repeal the Second Amendment, if y'all get it done.

But I rise to the bait again. You don't give a damn about gun control one way or the other. You don't gave a damn about Liam Neeson's citizenship status. You are just trolling, trying to piss some one off, hoping to get a rant out of them or get them to make a declaration that they put you on their ignore list.

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

mikee: as you do so often, you fail to address the questions asked, jump to erroroneous conclusions and resort to personal attack...it appears that you like others are incapable of having a rational discussion here about controversial topics...

you are welcome to try again, if you like...but, before doing so, please take a deep breath, loosen your belt and count to five...

and mikee, please get real...

it is doubtful anyone who particapates in this forum on a regular basis favors the repeal of the second amendment. certainly not i.

ed you don't give a damn about the Second Amendment, one way or the other.



Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

oh, ok, mikee...have a nice day...

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

is there anyone out there willing to have a rational discussion regarding the need for some gun control in this country?

i mean, when and how do we as a society determine that we have too much of a good thing?

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

Ed:
Since you apparently feel the same way kindly remove yourself from our Country with the jerk you referenced above.
We are all well aware that you're a closet gun grabber along with the other pretenders on this forum.
As far as I'm concerned you either support the U S Constitution or you don't. If you don't then get the hell out.

There it is ed, you got the response you were hoping for.



Now give him another barb or two, kind of like horsemen do to the bull before the bullfighter comes out into the arena.

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

"is there anyone out there willing to have a rational discussion regarding the need for some gun control in this country?

i mean, when and how do we as a society determine that we have too much of a good thing?"

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

Ed Good-anti gun,anti-hunt troll, should be ignored!

Ignoring the cowardly troll Ed Good,is the worst possible thing for him- he is not a stable person.He is here to try and bait us into legitimizing his business and himself,he has NO friends,has NO life and needs attention IGNORE HIM.

The real reason Neeson became a US citizen is to rid himself of the oppressive taxation in the UK. If he feels so strongly about gun control I suggest he return to the mother land and any further roles he takes be devoid of the use of any firearms......and let us know how that works out for him.

and ed...there needs to be no rational discussion of gun control in the US.....the premise is irrational to say the least.

ken: do you have a source for your claim that neeson became a u.s. citizen to rid himself of oppressive taxation?

and are you now suggesting that any citizen who believes differently than you do, give up their citizenship?

millions of our fellow citizens may desire some form of gun control. is that not reason enough to have a discussion of the subject?

eduh,

1.Do you think it's just coincidence that the large number of UK entertainers gain US citizenship? Do the research.

2. Your trolling again.... but...I believe any citizen that is unhappy should relocate to somewhere they are. Especially if you have the means that Neeson does.

3. I believe that the vast majority of DGBBS'ers are not in favor of any additional gun control measures. If you want to discuss that please relocate to your favorite liberal web site.

4. Back away from the PC and go shoot some (non animate) clays...you'll be glad you did.

PS
Be sure to shoot Bio's and non toxic shot so you can feel good about that too!

Well, since we were told ten percent of guns out there jump up and commit violent crime, maybe we should have group counseling. Every gun dealer that hits a thousand in sales should have a voluntary coping session, just cuz they know they're enablers of ten gun crimes. Awe heck, it's probably not that bad.

interestingly, the second amendment does not define "arms".

so, why is the gun control issue often framed in the context of the second amendment?

why cant we discuss gun control without reference to the second amendment?

Why can't you state what gun controls you are advocating? That would be a good place to start this discussion. Can you just name one new gun control law that you think would do what you want?

How about we cut out the "kitchen table" FFL's with no retail location, that torch guns,hide defect in pictures and take advantage of unknowing buyers in Francistown NH ?

Let start there !

Mike
Ed aka "The Torcher" has stated that before and the gun controls he advocates are typical of a left wing gun grabbing Libtard.
He's on my ignore list and the only time I see what he posts is when he, unfortunately, is quoted by someone. The best thing to do IMO is ignore him since he contributes nothing useful here anyway.
Jim

well mikee: i am not advocating any specific gun control measures at the moment...

however, i am asking questions related to gun control. so far, have found no one here willing to tackle any of them...so far the responses have been just the typical personal attacks and meanness. and sadly, yours are included...often you have some lucid thoughts which you post here. seems like not today...

seems like i am beatin a dead horse here. might as well shoot the poor thing and move on...BANG!

why is the gun control issue something that we cannot discuss here?

ed I ask again for you to detail out what you mean by "rational gun control"

Describe the law that you would like written to meet the need you see for "regarding the need for some gun control in this country?"

Tell me what gun control measure you want passed and we will have a rational discussion about your proposed new gun law.

mikee: note that i am calling for rational discussion and not rational gun control as you suggest.

again, i do not have any specific gun control law in mind. just looking for discussion and exchange of ideas.

please review the gun control related questions i ask in this thread and please do respond to any or all, if you like.

to make it easy for you and others, here is a summary of the questions i asked in this thread:

a. we now have one gun for every person in this country...is that ok by you, or do you think that might be too many?

b. it is remarkable that the misuse of guns in the country is so very low. even at one percent misuse, that would be 3 million incidents of misuse of firearms? does anybody know the actual figure?

c. and, what about the original intent of the second amendment? did the founder fathers really want there to be a firearm for every hand, so to speak? or did they really intend for us to possess firearms necessary for self defense against enemies, foreign and domestic?

d. is there anyone out there willing to have a rational discussion regarding the need for some gun control in this country? i mean, when and how do we as a society determine that we have too much of a good thing?

e. do you have a source for your claim that neeson became a u.s. citizen to rid himself of oppressive taxation?

f. and are you now suggesting that any citizen who believes differently than you do, give up their citizenship?

g. millions of our fellow citizens may desire some form of gun control. is that not reason enough to have a discussion of the subject?

h. interestingly, the second amendment does not define "arms". so, why is the gun control issue often framed in the context of the second amendment?

i. why cant we discuss gun control without reference to the second amendment?

j. why is the gun control issue something that we cannot discuss here?

ed I am fine with the ratio of one gun per person and would be fine if it goes higher.

What is your opionion of the 1 gun to 1 person ratio?

Yes, Neeson moved here to pursue his dream of gun control guru.

I vote we start by taking yours away permanently and prohibiting you access to them as well. THe rest of us have constitutional rights to have them. End of discussion. Its NOT negotiable.

Really.....do you actually believe the second amendment was talking about arming bears? Apparently many democrats do, as well as ALL liberals..

It doesn't Define what "arms" are because unlike most Democrats ....the founders and writers of the constitution were capible of thinking beyond tomorrow or next week.

Because they are not narrowly defined...it automatically means it in a very broad definition.

Hey the Libtard other founder of Microsoft Paul Allen is really catching some left wing flak because he just bought a NAZI Tank! He also dontated $500,000 to Bloombergs MAGGOTS** campaign.
**I for one am not letting Bloomberg's (MAIG) name change stand as MAGGOTS is too good and acronym to give up!!
Jim

http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/09/16/liberal-billionaire-gun-grabber-buys-nazi-tank/

"What is your opionion of the 1 gun to 1 person ratio?"


mike: i dont know...on the surface, ii sounds like too many guns in the hands of the general public; due to the potential for misuse. sorta like, the more cars we have the more potential there is for accidents involving cars and drivers.

but then, like cars, the misuse of guns seems to be extra ordinarily low, considering the number of them in the hands of the general public. course you can say the same thing about other potentially dangerous items, as well.

so, to answer your question, i dont know...

and, traditionally, each state answers the question with their own laws. the two extremes here in new england are mass and vermont. mass has very restrictive guns laws. vermont does not.

This is the most sensible suggestion I've seen yet short of him being sent to an institution for the mentally handicapped

The purpose of every discussion of "gun control" is to restrict our rights,never to increase them.How can you have a reasonable discussion when there can only be one result?
Mike

I won't be watching Liam Neeson's highly touted new movie "A Walk Among the Toombstones" coming out Friday. Small protest but since he has decided to diss his action movie fan base, it may grow.

Something about the hypocrisy of a Hollywood type making great sums of money playing characters in shoot-em-up action movies and then advocating gun control just doesn't play well in my view...Geo

+2......

If anyone has an email address for this joker please post it. I for one will let him know exactly what I think.
Jim

why cant we discuss gun control without reference to the second amendment?

For the same reason we can't talk about freedom of the press without bringing in the First Amendment.

The can't reason we can't discuss the NSA surveillance programs without talking about the Fourth Amendment.

How would someone argue about states' rights without bringing in the Tenth Amendment?

Now let me ask you a question. Why would you want to leave the Second Amendment out of your argument when you are advocating more gun control?

If anyone has any reason to wonder why I have "Ed" on my ignore list just look at that inane comment that Mike posted above.
I guess we could discuss apple pie without bringing up apples!
Jim

While I don't think they're hypocrites making shoot-em-ups then talking gun control, after all its just a movie, people all over the world are scrutinizing America and her Second Amendment. They don't understand us, they see no reason behind it and feel that all people MUST live subjected to someone.


Well, we will never feel or live that way.

While I don't think they're hypocrites making shoot-em-ups then talking gun control, after all its just a movie, people all over the world are scrutinizing America and her Second Amendment. They don't understand us, they see no reason behind it and feel that all people MUST live subjected to someone.


Well, we will never feel or live that way.

While I don't think they're hypocrites making shoot-em-ups then talking gun control, after all its just a movie, but people all over the world are scrutinizing America and her Second Amendment. They don't understand it, they see no reason behind it and feel that all people MUST live subjected to an all seeing and all knowing government.


Well, we will never feel or live that way.

I've often wondered if deep inside Ed's soul that he hopes one of the clapped-out torched up guns he sells blows up in someones face.

For the same reason we can't talk about freedom of the press without bringing in the First Amendment.

The can't reason we can't discuss the NSA surveillance programs without talking about the Fourth Amendment.

How would someone argue about states' rights without bringing in the Tenth Amendment?




Now let me ask you a question. Why would you want to leave the Second Amendment out of your argument when you are advocating more gun control?

the second amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. it does not define arms. and it does not prohibit governmnent at all levels from regulating and restricting certain classes of firearms. for example:

the federal firearms acts of the 1930's, 60's and 90's, all restrict and regulate the possession of firearms.

the regulation of handgun possession in states like ny and ma are long established law.

and the recent prohibition of certain semi auto firearms in ny is a recent example of state mandated firearms restriction.

and cities, such as nyc and chicago have a long history of restricting and discouraging the possession of handguns.

so, it seems that the second amendment and gun control are different issues?

Only among liberals....perhaps we should start spelling out what free speech really is and isn't...to OUR satisfaction (conservatives), and impose that upon the lefties. After all the First amendment doesn't define free speech.

If it weren't for the Second Amendment then firearms would still be completely illegal in Washington DC: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

If it weren't for the Second Amendment Chicago would also be allowed to prohibit the private ownership of firearms as they used to before this decision:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/us/29scotus.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%221%22%3A%22RI%3A10%22}

Your argument that the Second Amendment doesn't clearly include firearms when it said "arms" is a truly stupid argument.

So why do you want to leave the Second Amendment out of your advocacy of more gun controls?

bonehead: thank goodness we have the supreme court to interpretate the meaning of the constitution for us.

mikee: there you go again...first you claim i am advocating for more gun control and now you say i claim the second amendment does not include firearms...will you ever get it right? your failure to recognise the reality of existing gun control statues and pratices is unrealistic. and to claim that the second amendment prohibits government from restricting and controlling the possession of certain firearms may be a wish but has not been a reality, since 1934.

ed if the Second Amendment doesn't protect the individual right to keep and bear firearms how come Washington DC and Chicago have to allow their citizens to have firearms? How come Illinois had to write and implement a concealed carry law?

So tell my why you think we should leave the Second Amendment out of our arguments against your constant advocacy of more gun control?

Mike:
Again you are preaching to a brain dead Libtard. The don't care about facts and it's questionable if they can even comprehend facts when presented with them. A minute fraction of the gun owning population misuses firearms so we have to restrict EVERYONE'S RTKABA. That's their mantra.
This is the same tired old Libtard argument "If IT will prevent one firearms homicide-------------". "IT" of course is always a restriction on our rights. The only practical measure to reducing non gang/drug related violence is to lock up the mentally ill like we used to before these same Libtards who want to eliminate your rights got them released from institutions.
Of course the true hard core lefties don't really care about crime and it's just used as a reason to confiscate guns. Their ultimate goal is a gun less society where their socialist programs can be instituted to the fullest with no chance of an armed insurrection to prevent them.
Jim

Far more people die from cars, knives, baseball bats, hockey sticks, that stupid thing LaCross players use, and basically any object short enough to swing and heavy enough to do damage, than by guns every year.....where is the call to control those?

Using your own examples hows yer gun control working out ?

well joe, most of the gun control laws mentioned above have no affect on my business. i dont sell cartridge firing hand guns. and i dont sell full auto nor semi auto long guns. i do sell sxs shotguns and antiques. without the federal legislation that requires interstate dealer transfer of modern firearms made after 1898, i would not be using the internet as a marketing outlet, except for non cartridge firing antique firearms...

1958: "Well, we will never feel or live that way."

sadly, the more terrorist attacks we experience, the more we will demand government protection...and that protection will result in a more all seeing and all knowing government.

bonehead: none of the objects of potential harm that you list above, can be readily utilized to commit murder on the scale and at the speed that can be achieved with the mis use of semi auto firearms...

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't think being limited to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors are going to slow the crazies down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

For those old enough to remember the problems in Northern Ireland, explosives are easy to make and use...

mike: you could be right...but then we need to try different things to keep dangerous weapons out of dangerous hands? or do we? like you know, in the uk and elsewhere where the general public is banned or restricted from possessing handguns?

oh, and the saudis used four engine jet powered aircraft with full tanks of high octane aviation fuel, as i recall. and if you really think about it, maybe you will also recall...

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

"For those old enough to remember the problems in Northern Ireland, explosives are easy to make and use..."

ken: the problems in north ireland are caused by the presense of the british army, going on 800 years now...when the brits and scots go home, ireland will be reunited. then and only then should there be peace in all of ireland.

Ed,

My point was that when guns are unavailable, explosives are an easy substitute, as are many other things. To think that it's a matter of methodology instead of morality is preposterous.

Ken he knew exactly what your point was, as did everyone else that read it. He doesn't want to have an honest debate with someone that disagrees with him on some point. He just mills about, trying to aggravate, irritate, and provoke. He is truly a lowly troll, contributing nothing here.

Pledge drive to ban ed good for good.

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

Ken,

Ed Good is a useless demented troll and wants nothing more then to "qualify" his miserable existence in the gun world in spite of his years of taking advantage of rookie gun buyers with his POS guns !He does not want to get anyone's point,he just wants to attention.

To support your point;
What was the Bath School disaster wand how did Andrew Kehoe kill 45 children and wound 58 others ?????


http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bauerle/disaster.htm

I think the old fool forgot to take his Phillips Milk of Magnesia again. He's so constipated shit is backed up into his skull and shorted out his brain.

Oh yes they can....ALL of them can...you could walk into any grocery store and get enough stuff to do very evil things on a mass scale. I won't mention any specifically so nobody gets ideas or takes it the wrong way.

Ed Good the " fool from Francestown" destroying more guns then most liberal politicians- and proud of it !

Its way past time we put him on ignore and let his business just end up in the trash bin were it belongs

is that it? is that all you got? you guys dont have a counter arguement to neeson'a statement, so you resort to childishness name calling and personal attacks. sadly, guys like you do more harm to gun owners rights than you know...or is that your real motive for posting here?

i mean, would any responsible adult be comfortable knowing some of you actually possess firearms?

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

Can I be proactive in discussion. I would like a 500 round magazine for my favorite double. In the spirit of compromise, I'll give up a little. Will you accept 450 round hicap mags. The ball's in your court, what say you, can we live with this compromise to make our streets and children safer.

yeah, but...is there anything he,(neeson) says above that has any merit?

like, we now have one gun for every person in this country...is that ok by you, or do you think that might be too many? and, then consider that if the 300 million figure is accurate, then it is remarkable that the misuse of guns in the country is so very low. even at one percent misuse, that would be 3 million incidents of misuse of firearms? does anybody know the actual figure? i suspect it is much less than one percent.

and, what about the original intent of the second amendment? did the founder fathers really want there to be a firearm for every hand, so to speak? or did they really intend for us to possess firearms necessary for self defense against enemies, foreign and domestic? i suspect it is the latter...

and heres an answer to neeson's statement:

because we are such a heavily armed society, the reality of that fact serves as a deterent to those who would misuse firearms to commit criminal acts...

you know, like the best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun?

in a perfect world there would be no bad guys. but, the reality is, we do not live in a perfect world. and as such, we need the freedom to possess firearms for self defense. that is why we americans have the right to keep and bear arms as defined by the second amendment to our constitution.

and liam, congratuations on becoming one of us. so, embrace our laws and culture. and of course, you are welcome to lobby for change... that too is the american way.

Tell you what ed, when you quit with your childish phoney ebonics maybe you will get a little respect. In the meantime you're so constipated you're bubbling over and your mouth is spewing forth crap like a cow that just ate green thistles.

jrb: if you wish to discuss ebonics and constipation, thats fine by me. but, please start your own thread and do it there. this thread is about:

"Liam Neeson speaks out in favor of gun control"

See ed you CAN do it. You can speak normal. You must have taken some Phillips.

jrb: so, do you have a response to neeson's statement?

anybody?

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

anybody else?

Hey you old fart, don't forget to take your Geritol and Phillips Milk of Magnesia after breakfast.

guess not...

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I dunno ed, a score of Saudis killed 2900 Americans using boxcutters.

The Santa Barbara mass murderer killed three with machetes and three with Glocks.

The Navy Yard shooter killed twelve with a pump shotgun. Some of his shooting victims were cops armed with semi-autos.

Then there are the pressure cookers stuffed with 4th of July firecracker powder.

And if you and other like minded citizens are successful in getting semi-autos outlawed I don't believe limiting the crazies to revolvers, pumps, lever actions and doubles with ejectors is going to slow them down much.

People, once they set their mind to it, are very cunning killers, regardless of their resources.

Just look at this. I reminded him to take his Geritol and Phillps Milk of Magnesia. What does he do?...........The dumb shit took Sominex.