Gabrielle Giffords column: ‘I’m furious’

[MACS-24]

Except there was no registration
PolitiFact | Gun-rights group says Senate bill proposes

The devil is in the details. It only bars the AG from creating a registration. Whose to say some one won't exploit that loophole and have another dept. create one later.

 

[humbolt]

The devil is in the details. It only bars the AG from creating a registration. Whose to say some one won't exploit that loophole and have another dept. create one later.

ATF actively seeks records of registration from states. ATF is part of Justice. To say they are barred from doing what they are doing means nothing.

 

[TurtleDude]

Not saying im "experienced" but i do own firearms...


A simple background check to see if your a felon, mentally unstable, etc etc, close the gun-show loophole before you purchase a firearm...

when you talk about a gun show loophole you demosntrate you have no actual understanding of the current state of the law and thus your opinion on what laws are needed must be rejected as specious

 

[MACS-24]

ATF actively seeks records of registration from states. ATF is part of Justice. To say they are barred from doing what they are doing means nothing.

Exactly, it sounds like purposeful word-play. As long as the AG didn't explicitly do the list. From my understanding it bars the AG not necessarily the whole AG office.

 

[ttwtt78640]

when you talk about a gun show loophole you demosntrate you have no actual understanding of the current state of the law and thus your opinion on what laws are needed must be rejected as specious

What the gun show loophole really means is that now all private gun sales are exempt from the NICS BG check requirement, which applies only to FFL dealer sales whether at a gun show, selling to their own mother or any other gun sale from their registered inventory. The bill, S.649, sought to force all US gun sales to go through FFL dealers, thus making these FFL dealers responsible for all US gun sales with very few exceptions. It lacked any means of enforcement, short of backtracking each gun "found" to determine its sales/transfer history; which, naturally, required examination of gun registration records to do so.

 

[humbolt]

Exactly, it sounds like purposeful word-play. As long as the AG didn't explicitly do the list. From my understanding it bars the AG not necessarily the whole AG office.

When the government has information it considers useful - for whatever purpose - it will not destroy it. What we are being asked to accept strains credulity.

 

[MMC]

So wait your bull**** about supposed "gun registry" in the bill was bull****? And you dont realize the the USSC stated that congress has the right to regulate firearms?

Oh I see.....so you were going with the Bull**** on the reading tip, Right. Uhm that's with the Bill.....Correct?

The actual bill's opening description says it all:

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale, and for other purposes.

Link to the real bill:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...113s649pcs.pdf

Was the English Language full of so much Bull****.....that when ya read it.....That you really didn't understand what it was saying?

 

[LaMidRighter]

So basically what you are saying is we should "uphold the constitution" based on the originalist opinion..



You really havent.. All you said was that "the court doesnt uphold the constitution sometimes" (AKA they dont uphold my opinion sometime)

Let's see, the court gave itself a power under Marbury v. Madison, then it went on in the centuries following to abuse a power it gave itself, and some people give same court absolute credibility. Gee, no problems there.:roll:

 

[CLAX1911]

Too bad. I don't care who is angry about this.

Me either.

 

[Smartmouthwoman]

Wonder if she threw as big a tantrum as Barack did. How embarrassing was that fit surrounded by parents of kids killed at Sandy Hook? Whatta clown.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Wonder if she threw as big a tantrum as Barack did. How embarrassing was that fit surrounded by parents of kids killed at Sandy Hook? Whatta clown.

If I had voted for a person who cried like a baby because they didn't get their way I would be humiliated.

 

[American]

Wonder if she threw as big a tantrum as Barack did. How embarrassing was that fit surrounded by parents of kids killed at Sandy Hook? Whatta clown.

She already gets a lifetime pension that will keep her well off forever, why does she now want to dishonor herself and embarrass her family?

 

[LowDown]

Read more: Gabrielle Giffords column: ?I?m furious? - David Cohen - POLITICO.com

I would have to agree. Simple common sense.... Its shameful.. [/FONT][/COLOR]:neutral:

The only reason that she'd be mad about this is that she's ignorant of the issue. None of the proposed laws would have done a thing about the risk of school shootings.

 

[Oceandan]

I thought it was the most entertaining presser from this administration ever. I mean you had Uncle Joe doing a Jeff Dunham's "Walter" face and you had the current occupier of the White House close to frothing at the mouth, what more could you ask for? Plus you still had the exploitation of the Sandy Hook families. It was very entertaining.

 

[LaMidRighter]

The only reason that she'd be mad about this is that she's ignorant of the issue. None of the proposed laws would have done a thing about the risk of school shootings.

I thought about that too. She wouldn't even have been protected by the proposals, Laughner passed a background check at an FFL dealer, he was under observance from the local sheriff's department.

The only way Giffords could have been shot in Tucson was a massive, system wide failure on all levels from event security, to the enforcement of locals, to the courts not committing him to a mental institution.

 

[MMC]

I thought about that too. She wouldn't even have been protected by the proposals, Laughner passed a background check at an FFL dealer, he was under observance from the local sheriff's department.

The only way Giffords could have been shot in Tucson was a massive, system wide failure on all levels from event security, to the enforcement of locals, to the courts not committing him to a mental institution.

Not to mention Miss I carry gun wasn't carrying hers that day.....nor was her hubby. Here she don't want to push her Rights over those in her own state.....yet she wants to run around and party with Obama. Play with the Media and try and take the Rights of others in all states. Again without even trying to take the Rights of those in her community Right where she lives. Yet most of the Anti gunners accept this hypocrisy.

She has been shot.....in a blue moon type of event. She doesn't live in a dangerous environment where she could be shot everyday, every night. She isn't living around bangers, thugs, thieves and rapists. Which none of anything she says will stop these types from getting guns.

So when Gabby has something to say.....first Gabby has to demonstrate, that she has some sort of clue as to what she is talking about. Playing the Victim and crying out for the children doesn't work around here.

 

[Smartmouthwoman]

She already gets a lifetime pension that will keep her well off forever, why does she now want to dishonor herself and embarrass her family?

I'm still disgusted by her husband allowing the Dims to parade her around like a puppet on a string back when she didn't even know her own name. She deserves a lifetime pension for agreeing to be used as the party's pawn.

 

[MaggieD]

Read more: Gabrielle Giffords column: ?I?m furious? - David Cohen - POLITICO.com

I would have to agree. Simple common sense.... Its shameful.. [/FONT][/COLOR]:neutral:

 

[Henrin]

Look into MY face and tell me you are protecting my right, Gifford.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Oh I see.....so you were going with the Bull**** on the reading tip, Right. Uhm that's with the Bill.....Correct?

The actual bill's opening description says it all:

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale, and for other purposes.

Link to the real bill:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...113s649pcs.pdf

Was the English Language full of so much Bull****.....that when ya read it.....That you really didn't understand what it was saying?

Sorry but there is still no gun registry in this. There is a database of felons and mentally unstable people who should not have guns but still no registry in this bill.

 

[blaxshep]

Sorry but there is still no gun registry in this. There is a database of felons and mentally unstable people who should not have guns but still no registry in this bill.

Then how do you propose they will be able to track and trace?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Then how do you propose they will be able to track and trace?

There is nothing about "tracking and tracing" firearms in the Senate bill that got shut down. Its universal background checks.

 

[MMC]

The actual bill's opening description says it all:



Sorry but there is still no gun registry in this. There is a database of felons and mentally unstable people who should not have guns but still no registry in this bill.

Well.....it was the wording and intention. Which is what I brought up before. Moreover you should note that part for other Purposes, as well.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Not to mention Miss I carry gun wasn't carrying hers that day.....nor was her hubby. Here she don't want to push her Rights over those in her own state.....yet she wants to run around and party with Obama. Play with the Media and try and take the Rights of others in all states. Again without even trying to take the Rights of those in her community Right where she lives. Yet most of the Anti gunners accept this hypocrisy.

She has been shot.....in a blue moon type of event. She doesn't live in a dangerous environment where she could be shot everyday, every night. She isn't living around bangers, thugs, thieves and rapists. Which none of anything she says will stop these types from getting guns.

So when Gabby has something to say.....first Gabby has to demonstrate, that she has some sort of clue as to what she is talking about. Playing the Victim and crying out for the children doesn't work around here.

Nothing to add, just quoting for truth.

 

[Surtr]

gave into fear

lol, and rushing to ban guns all willy nilly due to a couple of high profile shootings isn't giving into fear?

I'm sorry for what happened to her, it was a terrible crime, but that doesn't excuse her push for legislation that punishes the nation as a whole. Two wrongs don't make a right.