Tom_Joad
New member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2013
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Banana Republic of Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
But you better listen to him, cause he owns a .38. :roll:
But you better listen to him, cause he owns a .38. :roll:
I figured it wouldn't take long for the gun nuts to come crawling out of the woodwork like the cockroaches that they are.
when you make comments like that you prove that your desire for gun restrictions is based on your dislike of gun rights advocates rather than the violent criminals your side of the political aisle tends to be so supportive of
That is the Breaking News banner headline on cnn.com.
Fox News' banner reads: "SENATE REJECTS PLAN EXPANDING GUN BACKGROUNDCHECKS IN 54-46 VOTE"
Edit: And now there is a full link to include.
Background check plan defeated in Senate, Obama rips gun bill opponents | Fox News
The proposal would have expanded background checks to gun shows and Internet sales while exempting personal transactions.
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-113s649pcs/pdf/BILLS-113s649pcs.pdf
its obvious you see incremental gun banning as a proper strategy
Funny how that percent keeps getting bigger and bigger every time I see it lol.
The big lie, included in the OP quote:
This was never in the original bill and I can find no amendment proposed to make it so. I have posted the link to the actual bill; note that the words internet, gun show or private sale are not even mentioned in it.
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-113s649pcs/pdf/BILLS-113s649pcs.pdf
Note that When Reid read it from the Floor of the Senate that he called it Anti Gun Legislation. Recorded down for all of Posterity and Caught on Film too. To be Forever held within the Records of the Senate.
The big lie, included in the OP quote:
This was never in the original bill and I can find no amendment proposed to make it so. I have posted the link to the actual bill; note that the words internet, gun show or private sale are not even mentioned in it.
The actual bill's opening description says it all:
Note that When Reid read it from the Floor of the Senate that he called it Anti Gun Legislation. Recorded down for all of Posterity and Caught on Film too. To be Forever held within the Records of the Senate.
Yep. The actual bill, S. 649, was voted down yet the squeals from the losers were stating all sorts of alternate things had "really" occurred. The most amazing thing, IMHO, was that the bill, S. 649, contained $800 million in funding for getting more "bad folks" listed in the NICS database and extra funding for local "school security" yet ZERO allocation for any additional federal enforcement. I also assume that it was to be considered as "emergency" legislation since no "pay as you go" spending offsets were ever discussed either.
Even 3 Democrats voted against this Fascist gun grabbing nonsense
The American People want a growing economy and jobs. Not gun grabbing schemes from fascists like Obama and the Democrats
Ah yes, we dont agree with your interpretation, so we must be stupid. Next youll say its racism, no doubt.
Its not a matter of "agreeing with interpretation". Its about educating yourself and having a minimal level of knowledge of how Supreme Court scrutiny works. You are simple dead wrong if you believe otherwise. Sorry. that is just the facts.
The very sad reality is that until enough innocent blood washes over the nation - let us say an almost monthly occurrence of Sandy Hook or Aurora - the power and influence of the gun lobby will not be overcome. The gun lobby has been winning for a long time now and will continue to win.
I have a .38 revolver in my car too.
And I find it a major embarrassment to be a gun owner right now.
To me it's un****ingbelieveable that due to these knuckle dragging gun nuts this watered down gun background check law can't pass.
I'm ****ing disgusted with their paranoid asses.
93% of Americans are in favor of background checks. Sad that 46 Senators lack a backbone to stand up to the NRA and the wacko gun lobby.
I would most certainly be in favor of more gun control than we have now.
For example, I consider the desire to own or posses an assault rifle by a civilian as prima facie evidence that said individual is mentally unstable and should be barred from owning or possessing any kind of firearm.
Its not a matter of "agreeing with interpretation". Its about educating yourself and having a minimal level of knowledge of how Supreme Court scrutiny works. You are simple dead wrong if you believe otherwise. Sorry. that is just the facts.
Yes....I did. What part of "Do you believe it is the MOST important problem" do you not comprehend? Its a big leap to say that since people don't believe that it is the MOST important problem facing America that only 4% think it is important. NO.....what the poll says is that only 4% think it is the MOST important.......DOH!
You know, I had a guy in the shop yesterday, an old guy I've known a long time. The radio was on and there was a news update talking about what was being discussed in Congress. Harold pipes up and says he thinks it would be a good idea if they ban assault rifles. I was shocked because I know for a fact he keeps a. 38 revolver in his car, but he is literally the first person I have met in person who has said such a thing. Ever. So I shot him.
No I'm kidding. I changed his oil and sent him on his way. Of course he is entitled to his opinion, but I'm not buying 90%. I think it's more like the 54% we saw in the vote depending on how you ask the question. And if those folks want to be unarmed they can be. Their choice. But I'll keep mine, thank you.
I would most certainly be in favor of more gun control than we have now.
For example, I consider the desire to own or posses an assault rifle by a civilian as prima facie evidence that said individual is mentally unstable and should be barred from owning or possessing any kind of firearm.
I'm not sure what they are asking in these "polls". As we know, they can ask to get the answer they want. If they asked me if I am for background checks, I'd say yes. If they asked if I was for the passage of this bill, I'd say no.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?