- Joined
- Jun 11, 2011
- Messages
- 31,089
- Reaction score
- 4,384
- Location
- The greatest city on Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
That is seldom used. Do you want a mental evaluation to buy a gun?
to purchase a firearm, I have to answer a question stating whether or not I have been committed to a mental institution. If I answer "yes", I must then get a letter from a shrink stating that I am now mentally fit to own a gun.
I have no problem with this question. We don't need insane people owning firearms.
Holder knew and said so in a speech
Holder bragged about Operation Gunrunner in 2009 | Barbara Hollingsworth | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner
I know you're not really listening to what is being said, but read his comments. Do they sound like the program that actually was in progress?
Regardless, you're skipping the point. I have no doubt they were all told we have a program designed, as Holder said, "a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels." To indict Holder, which isn't Obama btw, you have to show he knew the details, was part of the designing of the plan, and OK the specifics. What you show in the Examiner seems to support that he didn't have a clue about the actual program.
He talks about it in a speech and knows nothing about it? That is just crap. The fact is this is being twisted and Holder is blocking the investigation. This seems to be a way Obama wanted to get at gun control.
For you to say all these agencies were involved and Holder is trying to stop the investigation shows me Obama and Holder are in this up to their necks.
Breitbart.tv » ATF Director: Holder Obstructing ‘Fast and Furious’ Probe
“Fast and Furious” Indeed – The Real Motive Behind the “Gun Walker” Fiasco | RedState
You jump to too many conclusions based on questionable sources. Sheep are easily led. Again, read what he said. Does it sound like the program to you? Be honest. Stop thinking about making political hay.
BTW, just so you know, it says nothing about Obama at all. You make a wild leap with that.
You deny anything that is negative for Obama. Have a better idea why Obama and Holder are did this program. They got caught and are now trying to deny any involvement and are trying to block the investigation.
I have no doubt they were all told we have a program designed, as Holder said, "a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels."
You can't just throw **** up and think that is enough. You actually have to have evidence. You lack that, that's all.
You can't just throw **** up and think that is enough. You actually have to have evidence. You lack that, that's all.
You have absolutely no way of knowing that.All the people on here that a oppose gun restriction laws have never endured a tragedy that involves the death of a child, friend, or family member as a direct result of POOR gun restriction laws.
You fail to understand the issue. One need not show a need in order to exercise a right.Why do Americans feel the need to carry Ak47 assault rifles, Uzi's, and M4A1's?
You cannot possibly show this to be true.I agree that using them for sporting is completely ok, but we all know 50% of people that own firearms do not lock them up properly to avoid theft and accidents with chilidren.
All of which is illegal. How do you propose w emake it more illegal?Its amazing how easy some kids can buy guns, and that includes semi-automatic guns on the streets these days..
They are, of course, correct. Making it harder for the law abiding to get a gun doesn't make it harder for a criminal to get a gun.Republicans complain that making it hard to buy a gun, is just another stupid Obama policy.
Enforce the laws we have now. Punish criminals to the full extent of the law.May I ask these people what THEIR solution is?
They meant to preserve the effectiveness of the militia. To do that, the right to keep and beard arms suitable for this purpose were protected.Its pretty easy to understand that our founding fathers did not mean Army-Grade assault rifles, and semi-automatic weapons when they wrote "the right to bare arms".
Ah - the ad hom, final refuge of those who have run out of talking points.Times have changed, and that calls for gun regulations to change. Pretty simple to understand really, if your not an arrogant red neck republican.
Evidence isn't ours on some message board to compile, it is for congress to gather. And from the look of redaction, and obfuscation coming from the administration, and Justice Dept. I would say that a reasonable person at this point would have to conclude that it doesn't look good for either Obama, or Holder.
j-mac
You refuse to accept the evidence. You are defending the fact the Obama administration made gun dealers sell weapons to known criminals which is the mexican drug cartels. You should be outraged not defending them.
So the blood of people killed with these weapons like the border patrol are on Obama's hands
You haven't presented any evidence. And no where did I say the program was a good one. You're using the same silly illogic to state my position as you use to convict Obama without evidence.
Yes I showed it was in the stimulus and that Holder talked about it in a speech in 2009 in Mexico. It was known in the Obama administration.
You have to show they knew the actual details.
1. No one denys it is in the stimulus. So, that is not evidence that either Holder or Obama knew the details.
2. Read what Holder said in 2009. He doesn't say anything that would suggest he knew the details. In fact, if you actually read his comments, he seems to be speaking of something else entirely.
So, no, you have not presented any actual evidence of what is actually being questioned. It is not knowledge of the name of the program, not that it was funded, but whether they knew the actual details of the program. You have to show they knew the actual details. You have not done this.
Your spin shows you are to partisan to see the truth.
Obama knew what democrats put in the stimulus and Holder spoke on it because he knew what was happening. This is a disgusting display of politicians breaking the law.
Your spin shows you are to partisan to see the truth.
You jump to too many conclusions based on questionable sources
judges restrict a person's right to own firearms all the time, whether or not they have been convicted of a crime.
Gun Control Act of 1968 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the Gun Control Act of 1968 forbids the sale of guns to anyone who:
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been
committed to any mental institution;
who does this adjudicating? a Judge.
who commits a person to a mental institution? a Judge.
They enforce the law. It's the law that says who doesn't get to own a gun, not a judge. Judges don't make laws.
Umm...no judges don't.
They do rule on the law. The hair you're splitting is mighty thin.
True, but they don't make the law. Congress makes the law. It's the whole three co-equal branches of government thing that Libbos hate so much.
Do you really believe he had all the details?
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?