Liberal's/obamao's Phoney "common Sense Gun Control"
-
Completely untrue that what I posted was untrue, but keep saying my posts are.
They are not. The fact you don't like them is a good thing.
Completely untrue that what I posted was untrue, but keep saying my posts are.
They are not. The fact you don't like them is a good thing.
I work in an area of government where handguns are registered and the FBI are processing NICS denial appeals. There may be a greater lag time as there was for passport applications when the Bush administration created the Homeland Security Department and then passed the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. When people freak out and flood the system work processes have to change.
-
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160122/no-way-out-feds-stop-processing-nics-denial-appeals
Now, how long that goes on, is the question. A temporary suspension because they transferred duties from
appeals reviews to the initial background check system is a bit understandable....
except that the background check system denies 2nd Amendment rights to innocent Americans.
-
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160122/no-way-out-feds-stop-processing-nics-denial-appeals
Now, how long that goes on, is the question. A temporary suspension because they transferred duties from
appeals reviews to the initial background check system is a bit understandable....
except that the background check system denies 2nd Amendment rights to innocent Americans.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160122/no-way-out-feds-stop-processing-nics-denial-appeals
Now, how long that goes on, is the question. A temporary suspension because they transferred duties from
appeals reviews to the initial background check system is a bit understandable....
except that the background check system denies 2nd Amendment rights to innocent Americans.
Again temporary suspension, back log, call it what you want the FBI will still perform the appeals in time. No one's 2nd Amendment rights are being denied. The appeals process will still continue and if the claim is unfounded the sale will proceed. If people who want to purchase implements that can be used to kill other people there has to be protocols in place to make sure individuals are properly vetted. If there is no issue they will be allowed to own said implement. It's not rocket science. Is the process slower now that many more people are buying guns, absolutely. If you want to support adding more government jobs to handle the process I'm with you. But the fact remains running background checks is a good policy that when run efficiently may make someone's life a bit more tedious but that is a very small price to pay, unless of course you want to further a political agenda.
-
Hey, like I've said before, I love background checks, and I have
passed them faster than the last gun biz dealer had seen often.
And, btw, just fyi for anybody who thinks it is interesting,
I have a ccw, and since surgery on my new knee, I have never gotten my firearm out
of lock up, even at night. That will change soon.
...was on two types of pain pills I rarely take now. That's just my own principle.
we don't know if it's temp...or Obamao uses it as an excuse to screw with people over purchases.
-
Hey, like I've said before, I love background checks, and I have
passed them faster than the last gun biz dealer had seen often.
And, btw, just fyi for anybody who thinks it is interesting,
I have a ccw, and since surgery on my new knee, I have never gotten my firearm out
of lock up, even at night. That will change soon.
...was on two types of pain pills I rarely take now. That's just my own principle.
we don't know if it's temp...or Obamao uses it as an excuse to screw with people over purchases.
I have a ccw, and since surgery on my new knee, I have never gotten my firearm out
of lock up, even at night. That will change soon.
...was on two types of pain pills I rarely take now. That's just my own principle.
Good principle.
I'm taking the class March 12th for my ccw with my G19. Would never carry it if I was under the influence of anything.
-
Hey, like I've said before, I love background checks, and I have
passed them faster than the last gun biz dealer had seen often.
And, btw, just fyi for anybody who thinks it is interesting,
I have a ccw, and since surgery on my new knee, I have never gotten my firearm out
of lock up, even at night. That will change soon.
...was on two types of pain pills I rarely take now. That's just my own principle.
we don't know if it's temp...or Obamao uses it as an excuse to screw with people over purchases.
Hey, like I've said before, I love background checks, and I have
passed them faster than the last gun biz dealer had seen often.
And, btw, just fyi for anybody who thinks it is interesting,
I have a ccw, and since surgery on my new knee, I have never gotten my firearm out
of lock up, even at night. That will change soon.
...was on two types of pain pills I rarely take now. That's just my own principle.
we don't know if it's temp...or Obamao uses it as an excuse to screw with people over purchases.
The vast majority of gun owners that I come in contact with are very responsible people. That being said gun sales are going through the roof, this is a temporary issue.
-
I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on gun control.
Hillary and Sanders are scrambling to get on the same page so they can sue gun manufacturers for crimes people commit with guns.
WSS
I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on gun control.
Agree. Hillary and Bernie both seem to want to go to no-guns on the streets.
Hillary and Sanders are scrambling to get on the same page so they can sue gun manufacturers for crimes people commit with guns.
Disagree with prosecuting gun manufacturers or retailers. As long as they fulfil the requirements regarding legal checks, they're golden. It's the legal checks that are the problem.
WSS
-
Well agree or not, right or wrong that's the platform.
WSS
-
Well agree or not, right or wrong that's the platform.
WSS
Well agree or not, right or wrong that's the platform.
WSS
Given the choice of a complete gun embargo or guns for everyone, I'd prefer the former. I'm sure there's a sensible way to approach a middle ground though.
-
Well agree or not, right or wrong that's the platform.
WSS
Given the choice of a complete gun embargo or guns for everyone, I'd prefer the former. I'm sure there's a sensible way to approach a middle ground though.
Well I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on that issue, I was just talking about Hillary and Bernie coming together on suing the gun manufacturers for people who commit crimes with guns. I thought that was pretty ridiculous but... that's what happens when you let bleary-eyed American leftists meld with opportunistic trial lawyers.Given the choice of a complete gun embargo or guns for everyone, I'd prefer the former. I'm sure there's a sensible way to approach a middle ground though.
WSS
-
Well I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on that issue, I was just talking about Hillary and Bernie coming together on suing the gun manufacturers for people who commit crimes with guns. I thought that was pretty ridiculous but... that's what happens when you let bleary-eyed American leftists meld with opportunistic trial lawyers.Given the choice of a complete gun embargo or guns for everyone, I'd prefer the former. I'm sure there's a sensible way to approach a middle ground though.
WSS
Well I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on that issue, I was just talking about Hillary and Bernie coming together on suing the gun manufacturers for people who commit crimes with guns. I thought that was pretty ridiculous but... that's what happens when you let bleary-eyed American leftists meld with opportunistic trial lawyers.
WSS
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
-
Well I think we all know where the Democrats want to go on that issue, I was just talking about Hillary and Bernie coming together on suing the gun manufacturers for people who commit crimes with guns. I thought that was pretty ridiculous but... that's what happens when you let bleary-eyed American leftists meld with opportunistic trial lawyers.
WSS
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
-
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
-
Hell they don't have a majority of people who want to ban "assault weapons" (a misused term). So I doubt there is a large voting block who want to ban them all.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846
-
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
A lot of voters will be for Trump, maybe democracy doesn't work
-
A lot of voters will be for Trump, maybe democracy doesn't work
A test on voter competency would result in a much more sensible debate. If you don't understand rudimentary economics, geo-politics, science, or whatever, you don't get to vote. But that'll not fly in any country, especially the US.
-
A lot of voters will be for Trump, maybe democracy doesn't work
A test on voter competency would result in a much more sensible debate. If you don't understand rudimentary economics, geo-politics, science, or whatever, you don't get to vote. But that'll not fly in any country, especially the US.
A test on voter competency would result in a much more sensible debate. If you don't understand rudimentary economics, geo-politics, science, or whatever, you don't get to vote. But that'll not fly in any country, especially the US.
Or IQ. Anyone under 110 cant vote. At least his would eliminate the dumbest of the dumb. You know, birds of a feather flock together. And dumb people have been breeding with dumb people for too long now. And the smart with the smart. Meaning we are creating a rift between stupid and intelligent that soon will be too wide to bridge.
-
I think you'd be surprised where Democrats want to. There is no disarming America, that genie can't be put back in the bottle. Now registration seems like a fair strategy.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
Actually I think a lot of voters would be for a total gun ban. That's not to say it's achievable, but people would be for it.
According to Gallup poll 27% believe that handguns should be banned for everybody except police and other authorized persons.
Interesting enough the number has trended downwards from 49% in 1969 to 41% in 1990 to 27% today
I imagine that's pretty close to a total gun ban anyway - even though it's only worded as hand guns.
---
And Trump is 100x better than the current 2nd place guy for the republican nomination. Much better than the others who want to impose no fly zones and refuse to talk to Putin and cause WW3.
-
A test on voter competency would result in a much more sensible debate. If you don't understand rudimentary economics, geo-politics, science, or whatever, you don't get to vote. But that'll not fly in any country, especially the US.
Or IQ. Anyone under 110 cant vote. At least his would eliminate the dumbest of the dumb. You know, birds of a feather flock together. And dumb people have been breeding with dumb people for too long now. And the smart with the smart. Meaning we are creating a rift between stupid and intelligent that soon will be too wide to bridge.
Or IQ. Anyone under 110 cant vote. At least his would eliminate the dumbest of the dumb. You know, birds of a feather flock together. And dumb people have been breeding with dumb people for too long now. And the smart with the smart. Meaning we are creating a rift between stupid and intelligent that soon will be too wide to bridge.
I'd say employment, income and productivity should be the standard for voting. Probably IQ as well.
Sounds good to you guys?
WSS
-
I'd also recommend military service prior to voting. 2 yrs.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login