unbillievable Posted July 1, 2016 Posted July 1, 2016 So lemme get this straight, I ain't the smartest guy in the world, but even I have to agree that some folks shouldn't be allowed to buy guns and ammo. Registered Democrats for instance shouldn't be allowed to buy guns and ammo nor should they be allowed to play with sharp objects or matches. It just makes sense, if you want to take away other people's rights yours should go with them. But I gotta disagree with what the smart guy said above. there ain't no difference between the terrorists in Gitmo and the people on the Terrorist Watch List beyond where they was picked up and put on their respected list. Except for the fact that the jerkwads in Gitmo did something and the funktards on the TWL are mostly still waiting for their chance to do something. So okay I guess that's a difference. Rock meet Hard Place, they got the right to bear arms, they also got the right to catch bullets. Hopefully before they slaughter any more innocent folks. You have to weigh the possible threat of terrorism vs the possible threat of government over-reach. As Americans, we historically fear the government more. Also, only one side of the argument is talking about taking away freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 So lemme get this straight, I ain't the smartest guy in the world, but even I have to agree that some folks shouldn't be allowed to buy guns and ammo. Registered Democrats for instance shouldn't be allowed to buy guns and ammo nor should they be allowed to play with sharp objects or matches. It just makes sense, if you want to take away other people's rights yours should go with them. But I gotta disagree with what the smart guy said above. there ain't no difference between the terrorists in Gitmo and the people on the Terrorist Watch List beyond where they was picked up and put on their respected list. Except for the fact that the jerkwads in Gitmo did something and the funktards on the TWL are mostly still waiting for their chance to do something. So okay I guess that's a difference. Rock meet Hard Place, they got the right to bear arms, they also got the right to catch bullets. Hopefully before they slaughter any more innocent folks. The problem with the terrorist watch list, is it violates your due process as an American citizen and can be used without justification or transparency to deny a citizen their constitutional rights. That's a problem. We are supposed to be a nation of laws.
DC Tom Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 The problem with the terrorist watch list, is it violates your due process as an American citizen and can be used without justification or transparency to deny a citizen their constitutional rights. That's a problem. We are supposed to be a nation of laws. Well, that...and it's a bull **** list. "Anyone with an Arabic name" would be a better watch list than the actual watch list. (Note: "Anyone with an Arabic name" would still be a very ****ty watch list.)
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 There was some speculation that large groups of black lives matters and the usual communist agitator types are organizing mass busing to Cleveland to do everything possible to stop or disrupt the RNC and prevent trump from getting the nomination. The story goes that many of Cleveland's cops don't want to work the RNC and they are scrambling on where to get additional security from. This isn't going to go well. Well, that...and it's a bull **** list. "Anyone with an Arabic name" would be a better watch list than the actual watch list. (Note: "Anyone with an Arabic name" would still be a very ****ty watch list.) What's ironic about that, is the very democrats leading the charge for these bills were also the ones railing against the terrorist watch list that came out of the patriot act. They are on record opposing it (which is correct IMO) but now did a complete 180 to try and limit gun rights and constitutional freedoms using a tool that they themselves have said is poorly executed, which it is. It's all just political theater trying to take more freedom from the people to consolidate it with the central authority.
IDBillzFan Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 There was some speculation that large groups of black lives matters and the usual communist agitator types are organizing mass busing to Cleveland to do everything possible to stop or disrupt the RNC and prevent trump from getting the nomination. Which shows you how stupid the far left is. Trump is their best chance for Hillary to take the WH. He hands her the keys. Why would you try to stop him? A gerbil could beat HIllary...but Trump? It'll be a blood bath.
George Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 You have to weigh the possible threat of terrorism vs the possible threat of government over-reach. As Americans, we historically fear the government more. Also, only one side of the argument is talking about taking away freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Okay, so what does this government overreach consist of? Beyond somebody who thinks they should be able to buy a gun not being able to? Why do I care if some Illegal Alien can't buy a gun in the USA? Why do I care if some mentally unstable jackhole can't get a gun. I should be much more concerned that those type people CAN buy guns. Terrorism means dead American citizens which I am sure we are both against. So why fight for the right of some illegal alien or crazy shitehead to get a gun? The problem with the terrorist watch list, is it violates your due process as an American citizen and can be used without justification or transparency to deny a citizen their constitutional rights. That's a problem. We are supposed to be a nation of laws. I agree with that up to a certain point. I also believe that gun registrations and permits should be treated the same way drivers licenses are; no matter which state issues them all states accept them equally. So when someone violates the law by consorting with known terrorists and/or visiting known terrorist strongholds what should we do? What actions should we take? Well, that...and it's a bull **** list. "Anyone with an Arabic name" would be a better watch list than the actual watch list. (Note: "Anyone with an Arabic name" would still be a very ****ty watch list.) And your expertise in this area consists of what, exactly?
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 Okay, so what does this government overreach consist of? Beyond somebody who thinks they should be able to buy a gun not being able to? Why do I care if some Illegal Alien can't buy a gun in the USA? Why do I care if some mentally unstable jackhole can't get a gun. I should be much more concerned that those type people CAN buy guns. Terrorism means dead American citizens which I am sure we are both against. So why fight for the right of some illegal alien or crazy shitehead to get a gun? I agree with that up to a certain point. I also believe that gun registrations and permits should be treated the same way drivers licenses are; no matter which state issues them all states accept them equally. So when someone violates the law by consorting with known terrorists and/or visiting known terrorist strongholds what should we do? What actions should we take? And your expertise in this area consists of what, exactly? Another part of this problem, if someone is unjustifiabley placed on the terror watch list and banned from owning guns that's a huge problem. That is unamerican and goes against our laws. The entire list is shady as hell and whomever ends up in that list cannot fight or dispute it. It's just a gs9 bureucrat somewhere putting your name down, and bam your constitutional rights are suspended. The thinking behind it is punishing you for a crime you have yet to commit. Think about that. That is scary territory. Even if you belong on that list which most people in there probably don't. Even so, our FBI shouldn't be hamstrung and told stop investigating so many muslims. If the FBI was allowed to do their jobs and the administration kept politics out of it they probably would have stopped Orlando before it happened. No way that guy should not have been under surveillance. It can be used as a tool by progressives to attack their enemies. Disagree, and you'll find yourself on that list too. I know we'd down the better part of a decade and half destroying American due process and freedoms and it's only continuing at an accelerated rate.
unbillievable Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 Okay, so what does this government overreach consist of? Beyond somebody who thinks they should be able to buy a gun not being able to? Why do I care if some Illegal Alien can't buy a gun in the USA? Why do I care if some mentally unstable jackhole can't get a gun. I should be much more concerned that those type people CAN buy guns. Terrorism means dead American citizens which I am sure we are both against. So why fight for the right of some illegal alien or crazy shitehead to get a gun? You have the IRS targeting conservative groups. You have Democrats pushing for criminal charges for anyone disagreeing with Global Warming. There are liberals demanding race quotas be used by police on whom to arrest. The over-reach is already here. The very first thing that will happen is that everyone will be put on the list. Then you'll have to prove you don't belong on it. Knowing the left, they'll intentional leave out obvious threats to be PC.
DC Tom Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 And your expertise in this area consists of what, exactly? What's yours?
Azalin Posted July 2, 2016 Posted July 2, 2016 Okay, so what does this government overreach consist of? Beyond somebody who thinks they should be able to buy a gun not being able to? Why do I care if some Illegal Alien can't buy a gun in the USA? Why do I care if some mentally unstable jackhole can't get a gun. I should be much more concerned that those type people CAN buy guns. The government over reach consists of denying people due process simply because they're on a list (which by the way, there's a huge difference between the Terror Watch List and the No-Fly List). Having your name on one of these lists should not mean that you can or should have your rights denied, and due process is a right afforded even to illegal immigrants.
George Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 Another part of this problem, if someone is unjustifiabley placed on the terror watch list and banned from owning guns that's a huge problem. That is unamerican and goes against our laws. The entire list is shady as hell and whomever ends up in that list cannot fight or dispute it. It's just a gs9 bureucrat somewhere putting your name down, and bam your constitutional rights are suspended. The thinking behind it is punishing you for a crime you have yet to commit. Think about that. That is scary territory. Even if you belong on that list which most people in there probably don't. Even so, our FBI shouldn't be hamstrung and told stop investigating so many muslims. If the FBI was allowed to do their jobs and the administration kept politics out of it they probably would have stopped Orlando before it happened. No way that guy should not have been under surveillance. It can be used as a tool by progressives to attack their enemies. Disagree, and you'll find yourself on that list too. I know we'd down the better part of a decade and half destroying American due process and freedoms and it's only continuing at an accelerated rate. while I agree with most of what you said I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make with the bolded statement. Is he the exception that proves the rule or are you saying that the FBI under a Republican administration would have caught him before the attack? You have the IRS targeting conservative groups. You have Democrats pushing for criminal charges for anyone disagreeing with Global Warming. There are liberals demanding race quotas be used by police on whom to arrest. The over-reach is already here. The very first thing that will happen is that everyone will be put on the list. Then you'll have to prove you don't belong on it. Knowing the left, they'll intentional leave out obvious threats to be PC. Okay, I guess that means just because you're Paranoid it doesn't prove that nobody is out to get you. What's yours? None, but I was asking questions, you're the one making definitive statements. So I'll ask again; your expertise in this area consists of what, exactly? The government over reach consists of denying people due process simply because they're on a list (which by the way, there's a huge difference between the Terror Watch List and the No-Fly List). Having your name on one of these lists should not mean that you can or should have your rights denied, and due process is a right afforded even to illegal immigrants. So an Illegal Immigrant shouldn't be able to get a driver's license but should be able to buy a gun?
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 while I agree with most of what you said I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make with the bolded statement. Is he the exception that proves the rule or are you saying that the FBI under a Republican administration would have caught him before the attack? I don't know. What I do know is this administration and justice department has made it known that if you investigate too many muslims it's bad for your career. So with that mentality from the highest levels of management down, and fear of losing your job you do the math and add it up.
unbillievable Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 So an Illegal Immigrant shouldn't be able to get a driver's license but should be able to buy a gun? How will an illegal alien be able to buy a gun on the bus back to their country?
/dev/null Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 So an Illegal Immigrant shouldn't be able to get a driver's license but should be able to buy a gun? Correct However in order to legally purchase a gun you need photo identification for the NICS
Azalin Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 So an Illegal Immigrant shouldn't be able to get a driver's license but should be able to buy a gun? Two questions: 1) Where did I say that? 2) How do you spell "stimulus"?
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 Two questions: 1) Where did I say that? 2) How do you spell "stimulus"? He's trying to be cute. The only people that should be able to own guns are law abiding American citizens. Period. If an illegal alien doesn't respect our immigration laws what makes you think they would respect our gun laws?
/dev/null Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 The only people that should be able to own guns are law abiding American citizens. Period. If an illegal alien doesn't respect our immigration laws what makes you think they would respect our gun laws? If illegal immigrants are granted the same Constitutional rights to public education and welfare benefits why should they be denied the Constitutional right to bear arms?
unbillievable Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 If illegal immigrants are granted the same Constitutional rights to public education and welfare benefits why should they be denied the Constitutional right to bear arms? The Supreme Court ruled in the 1982 case, Plyler v. Doe, that children in the country illegally could receive welfare benefits because they were in the country to no fault of their own and did not have the ability to change their status. But, it does not grant welfare benefits to adults who willingly entered the country illegally. Also, it is perfectly legal under Constitutional law for Congress to exclude classes of people from legislation. So by adding language into the health care reform bill that requires citizenship verification before an individual can receive affordability credits, it will prevent benefits from being given to illegal aliens. It's like giving them sandwiches on the bus back to their country.
Azalin Posted July 3, 2016 Posted July 3, 2016 He's trying to be cute. You're right - I understand what's he's trying to do. Hence, question #2.
George Posted July 4, 2016 Posted July 4, 2016 Two questions: 1) Where did I say that? 2) How do you spell "stimulus"? 1) You didn't, it's called an analogy. 2) You just spelled it so I'll define it: BullPucky Political Move designed to pretend the administration in power at the time is doing something. He's trying to be cute. The only people that should be able to own guns are law abiding American citizens. Period. If an illegal alien doesn't respect our immigration laws what makes you think they would respect our gun laws? Nope I'm cute with out trying. The bolded is a true statement. The Supreme Court ruled in the 1982 case, Plyler v. Doe, that children in the country illegally could receive welfare benefits because they were in the country to no fault of their own and did not have the ability to change their status. But, it does not grant welfare benefits to adults who willingly entered the country illegally. Also, it is perfectly legal under Constitutional law for Congress to exclude classes of people from legislation. So by adding language into the health care reform bill that requires citizenship verification before an individual can receive affordability credits, it will prevent benefits from being given to illegal aliens. It's like giving them sandwiches on the bus back to their country. Another true statement. You're right - I understand what's he's trying to do. Hence, question #2. Possibly true but highly doubtful.
Recommended Posts