Page 40 of 78 FirstFirst ... 3036373839404142434450 ... LastLast
Results 976 to 1,000 of 1930

Thread: United States Gun Control: Gun Control = Fascism Everybody!

  1. #976
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Actually there is a rather large loop hole involved.

    "(c) PROHIBITION OF NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY.-
    Section 923 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ”(m) The Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize the records of the-
    ”(1) acquisition or disposition of firearms, or any portion thereof, maintained by-
    ”(A) a person with a valid, current license under this chapter;
    ”(B) an unlicensed transferor under section 922(t); or
    ”(2) possession or ownership of a firearm, maintained by any medical or health insurance entity.”."

    YAY no Gun Registary! Well... unless someone else other than the Attorney General is tasked with creating a centralized gun registry. Whoops.

    Kind of like that whole "If you like your insurance plan, you can keep it" BS.
    Better read the rest of that bill

    SEC. 102. FINDINGS.
    Congress finds the following:
    (1) Congress supports, respects, and defends the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    (2) Congress supports and reaffirms the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.
    (3) Congress believes the Department of Justice should prosecute violations of background check requirements to the maximum extent of the law.
    (4) There are deficits in the background check system in existence prior to the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.
    (5) Congress and the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership, dangerous criminals and the seriously mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms; therefore, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.
    SEC. 103. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
    Nothing in this title, or any amendment made by this title, shall be construed to-
    (1) expand in any way the enforcement authority or jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; or
    (2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a Federal firearms registry.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Well, Pat Toomey pretty much explained why the Background Checks bill couldn't passed despite having the majority vote. Also, his approval rating has increased in Pennsylvania.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3192690.html
    Meanwhile, those who opposed the bill take a hit in popularity. Jeff Flake for example went from having a net positive to being the least popular Senator, even less popular than previous record holder, Mitch McConnell.
    Last edited by YourFavoriteUser; 2nd May 2013 at 10:45 PM.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  2. #977
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    Better read the rest of that bill

    SEC. 102. FINDINGS.
    Congress finds the following:
    (1) Congress supports, respects, and defends the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    (2) Congress supports and reaffirms the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.
    (3) Congress believes the Department of Justice should prosecute violations of background check requirements to the maximum extent of the law.
    (4) There are deficits in the background check system in existence prior to the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.
    (5) Congress and the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership, dangerous criminals and the seriously mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms; therefore, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.
    SEC. 103. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
    Nothing in this title, or any amendment made by this title, shall be construed to-
    (1) expand in any way the enforcement authority or jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; or
    (2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a Federal firearms registry.
    Hmm interesting, wonder if they can use the first part to get around the second part, or simply not call it a Firearms Registry.


    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    Meanwhile, those who opposed the bill take a hit in popularity. Jeff Flake for example went from having a net positive to being the least popular Senator, even less popular than previous record holder, Mitch McConnell.
    It isn't just the Senators taking a hit, Obama is as well.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/0...er-50-percent/

  3. #978
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,342

    Default

    I dislike it when politicians use Polls to justify passing bills in Congress. It's too easy to use misleading questions and many topics are too complex for simple answers.
    Stand by for political rant that no one else really cares about.

    3DS friend code: 1650 1976 9524

    My FS type is Steel with Magneton, Forretress and Bronzong.

  4. #979
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ldsman View Post
    I dislike it when politicians use Polls to justify passing bills in Congress. It's too easy to use misleading questions and many topics are too complex for simple answers.
    Not to mention, polls are inherently inaccurate. Poll people from two different areas of the U.S. on the same topic and each of the two polls will have very different results. This isn't an issue that a poll should decide.
    A Winner Is You!!!

    If you spend too much time thinking about a thing, you'll never get it done.
    - Bruce Lee

    The worst thing you can do in any business is blame the customer.
    - Willie 'Jack' Degel

  5. #980
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ldsman View Post
    I dislike it when politicians use Polls to justify passing bills in Congress. It's too easy to use misleading questions and many topics are too complex for simple answers.
    But hey, it doesn't hurt to at least listen to the electorate more instead of the lobbyists correct?

  6. #981
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SBaby View Post
    Not to mention, polls are inherently inaccurate. Poll people from two different areas of the U.S. on the same topic and each of the two polls will have very different results. This isn't an issue that a poll should decide.
    Since the polls SS and I posted were approval ratings polls, why does it matter what people in different parts of the country think? All that matters are the people of the Senators state. Ted Cruz, to pick a random senator, can be hated universally throughout the nation, but if Texans love him, that's all he needs.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  7. #982
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    Since the polls SS and I posted were approval ratings polls, why does it matter what people in different parts of the country think? All that matters are the people of the Senators state. Ted Cruz, to pick a random senator, can be hated universally throughout the nation, but if Texans love him, that's all he needs.
    And while Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire is already facing hostility in her state and not to mention concerning her election in 2016.

    Meanwhile, let's go to the NRA.

    New NRA President Porter: Civil War was the "War of Northern Aggression"

    Wayne LaPierre: How many Bostonians wished they had a gun two weeks ago?

  8. #983
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    He is right, you had a killer on the loose who had already killed a cop, and could have numerous explosives on his body. Who in that situation wouldn't want a gun to protect their family?

  9. #984
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    He is right, you had a killer on the loose who had already killed a cop, and could have numerous explosives on his body. Who in that situation wouldn't want a gun to protect their family?
    But however, what if those who don't stay in their homes would go out carry a weapon like an AR-15 and be mistaken for the killer only to get shot themselves by the police who are trying to do their job to identify the suspect they are looking far?

  10. #985
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But however, what if those who don't stay in their homes would go out carry a weapon like an AR-15 and be mistaken for the killer only to get shot themselves by the police who are trying to do their job to identify the suspect they are looking far?
    The police ordered everyone to stay in their homes, if someone was out and wandering around the Police would suspect that person was the killer, AR-15 or not.

  11. #986
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    The police ordered everyone to stay in their homes, if someone was out and wandering around the Police would suspect that person was the killer, AR-15 or not.
    Either way, how LaPierre said it makes him seem like he is looking down on the people of Boston and the one citizen who spotted Dzhokar actually called instead of being a reckless vigilante. It's one thing to buy a gun to protect yourself and your family but it is another to buy out of fear and hate.

  12. #987
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Either way, how LaPierre said it makes him seem like he is looking down on the people of Boston and the one citizen who spotted Dzhokar actually called instead of being a reckless vigilante. It's one thing to buy a gun to protect yourself and your family but it is another to buy out of fear and hate.
    Not really. It may be fear and hate, but the main reason would still be protection from the thing you fear and hate. There really is no logical argument against a Boston citizen having a gun in their home during that time.

    "What good is it for a man to gain the world, yet forfeit his soul?"

  13. #988
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Either way, how LaPierre said it makes him seem like he is looking down on the people of Boston and the one citizen who spotted Dzhokar actually called instead of being a reckless vigilante. It's one thing to buy a gun to protect yourself and your family but it is another to buy out of fear and hate.
    If you are buying a gun to protect your family, you are buying it out of fear for their safety and for protection, of which the same applies to the Boston Situation.

  14. #989
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    If you are buying a gun to protect your family, you are buying it out of fear for their safety and for protection, of which the same applies to the Boston Situation.
    Actually it does not. I mean rational fear and not irrational fear. I was going to point out before they choose to buy a gun, they need to be very responsible with it especially with their family. The problem is, I'm pointing out the whole gun obsession that those who buy it because they look cool or out of paranoia are likely to meet their downfall.

  15. #990
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Actually it does not. I mean rational fear and not irrational fear. I was going to point out before they choose to buy a gun, they need to be very responsible with it especially with their family. The problem is, I'm pointing out the whole gun obsession that those who buy it because they look cool or out of paranoia are likely to meet their downfall.
    Except having a gun on hand when you have a active terrorist on the loose who could be anywhere in your city, is a very rational fear.

    Worth noting the first 3D made gun has now been made and fired, the only non 3D piece is a metal firing pin, and 6 ounces of metal required by law. Homemade, non traceable guns, have now become a reality.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...hot/?ttag=fbwp
    Last edited by BigLutz; 7th May 2013 at 3:55 AM.

  16. #991
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Except having a gun on hand when you have a active terrorist on the loose who could be anywhere in your city, is a very rational fear.
    But that is hypothetical when we already saw the results. It depends on if the fear is justified depending on if you live in a rough neighborhood. What is irrational is the whole notion from those such as Glenn Beck who was the keynote speaker at the NRA convention said that government is the enemy even though later on the police were praised for the capture of the terrorist. That's the irrationality I'm talking about and that doesn't represent the majority of responsible gun owners.

    Worth noting the first 3D made gun has now been made and fired, the only non 3D piece is a metal firing pin, and 6 ounces of metal required by law. Homemade, non traceable guns, have now become a reality.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...hot/?ttag=fbwp
    Well the NRA should be against it because gun manufacturers would lose profits from this.

  17. #992
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But that is hypothetical when we already saw the results. It depends on if the fear is justified depending on if you live in a rough neighborhood. What is irrational is the whole notion from those such as Glenn Beck who was the keynote speaker at the NRA convention said that government is the enemy even though later on the police were praised for the capture of the terrorist. That's the irrationality I'm talking about and that doesn't represent the majority of responsible gun owners.
    Except the whole fear of the terrorist was what the quote is about, bringing in Glenn Beck or anything else is just engaging in a red herring.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Well the NRA should be against it because gun manufacturers would lose profits from this.
    I think those wishing for more Gun Control should be far more afraid, as things like this makes gun control rather useless.

  18. #993
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Perusing the North Pacific.
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Well the NRA should be against it because gun manufacturers would lose profits from this.
    Not really, homemade guns have been a reality for a long time now, 3D printing just makes the the process easier. As for the firearm manufacturers potentially losing money, you do realize the NRA only gets about 4% of their funds from them right? I really don't think they'd care that much.
        Spoiler:- My Custom Challenges:

  19. #994
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Except having a gun on hand when you have a active terrorist on the loose who could be anywhere in your city, is a very rational fear.

    Worth noting the first 3D made gun has now been made and fired, the only non 3D piece is a metal firing pin, and 6 ounces of metal required by law. Homemade, non traceable guns, have now become a reality.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...hot/?ttag=fbwp
    I'd like to highlight this part: In fact, the blueprint for the pistol is available for free online for anyone to access. And it's legal.

    Kind of makes gun control a pipe dream.

    Oh, and this: Democratic New York Sen. Charles Schumer, at a press conference on Sunday, called for a ban on printable weapons

    Just how do you propose to enforce this? take away our 3D printers? This is the democratic first response to anything these days: Ban, ban, ban!
    Last edited by TheWatersGreatGuardian; 7th May 2013 at 6:42 PM.

    "What good is it for a man to gain the world, yet forfeit his soul?"

  20. #995
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Except the whole fear of the terrorist was what the quote is about, bringing in Glenn Beck or anything else is just engaging in a red herring.
    Now here's the thing, while the conservatives often complain that the pro-gun control advocates are using actual victims from the Sandy Hook and other past shooting incidents... they don't have a problem using the Boston Bombing to sell more guns. Also, Beck WAS the keynote speaker at the NRA convention and the point is that right wingers like him and Bob Davis don't AND shouldn't represent the majority of responsible gun owners.

    I think those wishing for more Gun Control should be far more afraid, as things like this makes gun control rather useless.
    Not really because you have to remember that the 3D printed gun that was used isn't as fully functional.

    Not really, homemade guns have been a reality for a long time now, 3D printing just makes the the process easier. As for the firearm manufacturers potentially losing money, you do realize the NRA only gets about 4% of their funds from them right? I really don't think they'd care that much.
    But still, the NRA is still a lobbyist group and when Kelly Ayotte suffered a dive in her approval ratings from voting against the bill, they shown ads that supports her decision.

  21. #996
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Now here's the thing, while the conservatives often complain that the pro-gun control advocates are using actual victims from the Sandy Hook and other past shooting incidents... they don't have a problem using the Boston Bombing to sell more guns. Also, Beck WAS the keynote speaker at the NRA convention and the point is that right wingers like him and Bob Davis don't AND shouldn't represent the majority of responsible gun owners.
    I dont think it was a attempt to sell more guns but a attempt to explain the folly of gun control laws and how people wish for protection in a time of crisis.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Not really because you have to remember that the 3D printed gun that was used isn't as fully functional.
    You only really need one shot to kill someone, and mind you this is a prototype that will continue to be improved upon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But still, the NRA is still a lobbyist group and when Kelly Ayotte suffered a dive in her approval ratings from voting against the bill, they shown ads that supports her decision.
    And if this bill had past the NRA would be showing ads targeting the voters that passed it, just as what happened in 1994 when the Republicans swept into power.

  22. #997
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    And if this bill had past the NRA would be showing ads targeting the voters that passed it, just as what happened in 1994 when the Republicans swept into power.
    And I'm sure that Clinton's unpopularity over tax hikes and his failed health care plan and the massive Republican campaign had nothing to do with the Republican sweep. And the Manchin Toomey Bill was a lot more popular than the assault weapons ban, and the NRA had much higher approval ratings in the nineties.
    Last edited by YourFavoriteUser; 7th May 2013 at 9:29 PM.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  23. #998
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    And I'm sure that Clinton's unpopularity over tax hikes and his failed health care plan had nothing to do with the Republican sweep. And the Manchin Toomey Bill was a lot more popular than the assault weapons ban, and the NRA had much higher approval ratings in the nineties.
    It would be interesting to see how much those played in, and mind you what is popular now, could drop in popularity as people learn more about it, just look at Obamacare.

    Also to look at what happened in 1994, just ask Rep. Dan Glickman

    Quote Originally Posted by Huffington Post
    WASHINGTON -- It was the early fall of 1994 when Rep. Dan Glickman (D-Kan.) got his first piece of ominous news. An administrative aide in his district office reported an abnormal number of angry letters from constituents upset with his support for a ban on the manufacturing of assault weapons. Glickman sought counsel from his colleagues.

    “We are trying to work it out,” Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) told him. “But it could be a problem for you, Dan.”

    It was a sobering, chilling statement. But Glickman largely dismissed it. After all, he had just helped pass aviation jobs legislation that would be a boon for his constituents.

    “I just figured my services and work on this aviation jobs bill, good looks and funny mannerisms would get me through,” he recalled in an interview with The Huffington Post. “I thought I was an F-ing hero, to be honest with you."

    Instead, he became a cautionary tale for future lawmakers. Despite 18 years of service, Glickman was ousted from his House seat that November. His support for the 1994 assault weapons ban made him a political casualty of the gun policy wars.

    “I didn’t know I was in the epicenter of this controversy until I started going door to door in my district,” he said. "The NRA had made this issue Armageddon."
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2502719.html

    Mind you the popularity of the NRA nationally does not matter, what matters is it's popularity in the red districts that elect Democrats and give them a majority in Congress.

  24. #999
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    It would be interesting to see how much those played in, and mind you what is popular now, could drop in popularity as people learn more about it, just look at Obamacare.
    Wasn't Obamacare extremely unpopular from the start?

    Also to look at what happened in 1994, just ask Rep. Dan Glickman


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2502719.htmlMind you the popularity of the NRA nationally does not matter, what matters is it's popularity in the red districts that elect Democrats and give them a majority in Congress.
    And? This bill is not an assault weapons ban, it doesn't come close. Let's look at a modern senator, Mary Landrieu. She's running in deep red Louisiana next year, and virtually everyone agrees that her seat is in serious danger. Despite this, she voted for the bill, which many believed was a liabily. According to this poll, the vote can actually improve her chances, even in one of the most conservative states in the union.
    In Louisiana 72% of voters say they favor background checks to only 20% who are opposed. There is strong bipartisan backing with Democrats (81/13), independents (73/20), and Republicans (61/29) all expressing at least 2:1 support. 45% of voters in the state say they're now more likely to support Landrieu for reelection because she voted for background checks, compared to only 25% who say they're now less likely to vote for her. Landrieu has also seen a 6 point improvement in her net approval rating from the last time we polled the state in February, from +2 then at 47/45 to now +8 at 49/41.
    There's a similar story with Kay Hagan in North Carolina. Both are red state senators looking at tough re-election fights next year, and can thank this bill for improving their chances.
    It's a similar story in North Carolina. There 73% of voters support background checks with only 22% opposed. Again there is a strong consensus across party lines with more than 60% of Democrats (86/11), independents (67/28), and Republicans (61/34) all supporting them. 52% of voters say they're more inclined to reelect Hagan next year because she voted for background checks, while only 26% of voters say they will be less likely to support her because of it.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  25. #1000
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    Wasn't Obamacare extremely unpopular from the start?
    I would say it's popularity began to go further and further down as more word about it came out.

    Quote Originally Posted by WizardTrubbish View Post
    And? This bill is not an assault weapons ban, it doesn't come close. Let's look at a modern senator, Mary Landrieu. She's running in deep red Louisiana next year, and virtually everyone agrees that her seat is in serious danger. Despite this, she voted for the bill, which many believed was a liabily. According to this poll, the vote can actually improve her chances, even in one of the most conservative states in the union.

    There's a similar story with Kay Hagan in North Carolina. Both are red state senators looking at tough re-election fights next year, and can thank this bill for improving their chances.
    Well lets remember two things: A: PPP is a heavily Democratic polling firm so their results would be skewed in a liberal favor.

    B: Interest and support in Gun Control is falling like a rock.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/2...ntrol-failure/

Page 40 of 78 FirstFirst ... 3036373839404142434450 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •