• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christie signs 10 gun-control measures into law

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Christie signs 10 gun-control measures into law | Courier-Post | courierpostonline.com

Hasn't helped Chicago any, but I guess we shall see.

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie signed 10 gun-related bills into law Thursday, including a measure disqualifying people on the federal terrorist watch list from being able to buy guns.

In a statement accompanying his signature, the Republican governor said he signed the measure because federal authorities take care to ensure the list’s accuracy. Some conservatives expressed concern that citizens will be put on the watch list mistakenly.

“I believe that federal elected officials must continue to ensure that federal law enforcement and intelligence gathering entities constantly strive to improve the levels of accuracy and reliability in terrorist screening databases,” Christie wrote. “I urge Congress to take steps to ensure that law-abiding American citizens are never swept into these databases.”
This will probably take a lot off people off team Christie.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I haven't read any of the actual legislation but the things presented in the article all seem reasonable to me. I could see where some people would be uncomfortable with the law restricting those on the federal terror list from being able to purchase guns, but I can't imagine many people wanting terrorists being able to buy guns either.
 

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I haven't read any of the actual legislation but the things presented in the article all seem reasonable to me.
They do to me as well, but I feel there is a good point with regard to Chicago. Maybe somebody can fill me in on the whole "strictest laws in the land, highest rate of death by bullet" situation.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
They do to me as well, but I feel there is a good point with regard to Chicago. Maybe somebody can fill me in on the whole "strictest laws in the land, highest rate of death by bullet" situation.
Well, what you have to remember about Chicago is that it's a city, not a state or a country. If I live in Chicago and want to buy a gun, I'll go to a neighboring city to get one. The other thing to remember about Chicago is that the number of homicides and homicides by firearm have dropped significantly over the past 20 years.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,802
Reaction score
75,520
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I haven't read any of the actual legislation but the things presented in the article all seem reasonable to me. I could see where some people would be uncomfortable with the law restricting those on the federal terror list from being able to purchase guns, but I can't imagine many people wanting terrorists being able to buy guns either.
The worst thing is that many supporting his program are saying its a "GOOD FIRST STEP"
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Another reason the lard ass needs to hurry up and have a heart attack. Was that a bit cold? Well, it's a bit cold to not care about the rights of people.
 

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Another reason the lard ass needs to hurry up and have a heart attack. Was that a bit cold? Well, it's a bit cold to not care about the rights of people.
Lard ass had lap band surgery and is rapidly losing weight. You're going to have to find something else to denigrate him with.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Lard ass had lap band surgery and is rapidly losing weight. You're going to have to find something else to denigrate him with.
Sure, how about someone that needs lap band surgery to lose weight. What a ****ing loser.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,802
Reaction score
75,520
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Lard ass had lap band surgery and is rapidly losing weight. You're going to have to find something else to denigrate him with.
His constant Obama slurping is enough to make most sensible people want to puke without worrying if he is an Orca, a walrus or a hippo
 

Μολὼν λαβέ

Si vis pacem, para bellum
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
6,914
Reaction score
3,671
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I haven't read any of the actual legislation but the things presented in the article all seem reasonable to me. I could see where some people would be uncomfortable with the law restricting those on the federal terror list from being able to purchase guns, but I can't imagine many people wanting terrorists being able to buy guns either.
Ever hear about "Operation Fast and Furious" sponsored by the US Department of Justice?

'Fast and Furious' Scandal Returns to Haunt Obama - Businessweek
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate

BretJ

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
6,457
Reaction score
2,533
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Christie signs 10 gun-control measures into law | Courier-Post | courierpostonline.com

Hasn't helped Chicago any, but I guess we shall see.



This will probably take a lot off people off team Christie.
From what I have seen in the article, I have no issues with the watch list restrictions or forwarding mental health records to a point. I would have to see what constitutes a mental health issue which would warrant being added to the NICs database. Without checks and balances, it has potential to be abused.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The worst thing is that many supporting his program are saying its a "GOOD FIRST STEP"
To you, a good first step would be the forced distribution of automatic weapons. We'll just have to agree that we'll never agree.
Μολὼν λαβέ;1062170472 said:
Ever hear about "Operation Fast and Furious" sponsored by the US Department of Justice?

'Fast and Furious' Scandal Returns to Haunt Obama - Businessweek
I have. Have you?

Quite simply, there's a fundamental misconception at the heart of the Fast and Furious scandal. Nobody disputes that suspected straw purchasers under surveillance by the ATF repeatedly bought guns that eventually fell into criminal hands. Issa and others charge that the ATF intentionally allowed guns to walk as an operational tactic. But five law-enforcement agents directly involved in Fast and Furious tell Fortune that the ATF had no such tactic. They insist they never purposefully allowed guns to be illegally trafficked. Just the opposite: They say they seized weapons whenever they could but were hamstrung by prosecutors and weak laws, which stymied them at every turn.


Indeed, a six-month Fortune investigation reveals that the public case alleging that Voth and his colleagues walked guns is replete with distortions, errors, partial truths, and even some outright lies. Fortune reviewed more than 2,000 pages of confidential ATF documents and interviewed 39 people, including seven law-enforcement agents with direct knowledge of the case. Several, including Voth, are speaking out for the first time.
Even had they all gotten along, they faced a nearly impossible task. They were seven agents pursuing more than a dozen cases, of which Fast and Furious was just one, their efforts complicated by a lack of adequate tools. Without a real-time database of gun sales, they had to perform a laborious archaeology. Day after day, they visited local gun dealers and pored over forms called 4473s, which dealers must keep on file. These contain a buyer's personal information, a record of purchased guns and their serial numbers, and a certification that the buyer is purchasing the guns for himself. (Lying on the forms is a felony, but with weak penalties attached.) The ATF agents manually entered these serial numbers into a database of suspect guns to help them build a picture of past purchases.


By January 2010 the agents had identified 20 suspects who had paid some $350,000 in cash for more than 650 guns. According to Rep. Issa's congressional committee, Group VII had enough evidence to make arrests and close the case then.


This was not the view of federal prosecutors. In a meeting on Jan. 5, 2010, Emory Hurley, the assistant U.S. Attorney in Phoenix overseeing the Fast and Furious case, told the agents they lacked probable cause for arrests, according to ATF records. Hurley's judgment reflected accepted policy at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona. "[P]urchasing multiple long guns in Arizona is lawful," Patrick Cunningham, the U.S. Attorney's then–criminal chief in Arizona would later write. "Transferring them to another is lawful and even sale or barter of the guns to another is lawful unless the United States can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the firearm is intended to be used to commit a crime." (Arizona federal prosecutors referred requests for comment to the Justice Department, which declined to make officials available. Hurley noted in an e-mail, "I am not able to comment on what I understand to be an ongoing investigation/prosecution. I am precluded by federal regulation, DOJ policy, the rules of professional conduct, and court order from talking with you about this matter." Cunningham's attorney also declined to comment.)

It was nearly impossible in Arizona to bring a case against a straw purchaser. The federal prosecutors there did not consider the purchase of a huge volume of guns, or their handoff to a third party, sufficient evidence to seize them. A buyer who certified that the guns were for himself, then handed them off minutes later, hadn't necessarily lied and was free to change his mind. Even if a suspect bought 10 guns that were recovered days later at a Mexican crime scene, this didn't mean the initial purchase had been illegal. To these prosecutors, the pattern proved little. Instead, agents needed to link specific evidence of intent to commit a crime to each gun they wanted to seize.

None of the ATF agents doubted that the Fast and Furious guns were being purchased to commit crimes in Mexico. But that was nearly impossible to prove to prosecutors' satisfaction. And agents could not seize guns or arrest suspects after being directed not to do so by a prosecutor. (Agents can be sued if they seize a weapon against prosecutors' advice. In this case, the agents had a particularly strong obligation to follow the prosecutors' direction given that Fast and Furious had received a special designation under the Justice Department's Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. That designation meant more resources for the case, but it also provided that prosecutors take the lead role.)

The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal - Fortune Features


It's a fascinating read really.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,802
Reaction score
75,520
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,802
Reaction score
75,520
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So you think that people on the terrorist watch list ought to be able to buy gun just like anyone else?
I think if you are denied the right to own a gun because you are on some watch list that was not the result of at least a grand jury indictment and it turns out that you have done nothing wrong, then the person who put you on the list should be INDIVIDUALLY LIABLE for a constitutional tort suit meaning you can sue his ass into the poorhouse.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
that's just plain stupid.
It wasn't meant to be serious, merely to demonstrate how far apart we are on this issue.

I support freedom of choice. If you are terrified about owning a gun by all means don't own one. Indeed, as a professional, I would recommend you don't own one at all
I'm not terrified of a gun, but I have no desire to ever own one. And if I ever did change my mind, I would most certainly put myself through various forms of training in order to feel confident I was competent to own a gun. In other words, I would practice what I preach.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,802
Reaction score
75,520
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
It wasn't meant to be serious, merely to demonstrate how far apart we are on this issue.

I'm not terrified of a gun, but I have no desire to ever own one. And if I ever did change my mind, I would most certainly put myself through various forms of training in order to feel confident I was competent to own a gun. In other words, I would practice what I preach.
good, that is why I get at least 16 hours of formal training each year and shoot as many times as I can spare the time under the "clock" meaning speed shooting under time which is one of the best ways to duplicate traumatic shooting scenarios.

Don't own one but I also think you shouldn't enjoy the benefit of doubt that causes criminals to often avoid homes they think might be armed.

You should put signs on your home and car noting you are unarmed
 

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So you think that people on the terrorist watch list ought to be able to buy gun just like anyone else?
No, of course not. But the 2nd amendment supporters seem to think that any gun law is a bad gun law. That's all I've seen so far.
 

Lukas105

Active member
Joined
Oct 12, 2012
Messages
368
Reaction score
134
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other

Morality Games

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
3,733
Reaction score
1,156
Location
Iowa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I think if you are denied the right to own a gun because you are on some watch list that was not the result of at least a grand jury indictment and it turns out that you have done nothing wrong, then the person who put you on the list should be INDIVIDUALLY LIABLE for a constitutional tort suit meaning you can sue his ass into the poorhouse.
One of the implications of that belief is that bureaucrat in question should be so mortally afraid of being sued that they never take any meaningful actions against suspected terrorists.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
good, that is why I get at least 16 hours of formal training each year and shoot as many times as I can spare the time under the "clock" meaning speed shooting under time which is one of the best ways to duplicate traumatic shooting scenarios.
And see, if this concept was required to purchase a gun (maybe not even to the extent you train), I'd have MUCH less of a problem with our laws. But right now, it's obviously far too easy for those who would do harm to obtain a gun.

Don't own one but I also think you shouldn't enjoy the benefit of doubt that causes criminals to often avoid homes they think might be armed.
Despite what you may believe, I have never had a problem with responsible people having a firearm. The problem I feel we have is we have far too many irresponsible people with guns and far too lax protections on protecting guns from the hands of those who would use them for harm.

You should put signs on your home and car noting you are unarmed
I'll consider it the moment you advocate for you and your fellow gun-owners to be listed in an easily accessible directory, complete with your name and address, as well as the fact you own a gun.
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I'd have no problem with it if I knew how someone got on the terrorist watch list, but that seems a litlte nebulous. Lets remember the current
federal regime suggested to us that gun owning, Christian, Veterans with "anti government views" were a bigger threat to our nation than
al queda back in 2009 - so who's on the such a list, how'd they get there, etc? I don't like the idea of a person not convicted of a crime or
at least arrested having their rights removed?


So you think that people on the terrorist watch list ought to be able to buy gun just like anyone else?
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I can't say I am surprised. From what I can tell east coast republicans are liberals.
From what I can tell, Republicans call ANYONE they disagree with "liberals".
 
Top Bottom