Jump to content

Gun Control

Heavy 6

By Heavy 6
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mike "Wags" Wagner

Mike "Wags" Wagner 6

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

i dont know who you are or where you came from, but when they put you under rest assured there will be no doubt as to the sandiness of your vagina.  you are doing a great job here of showing you have ample.  are you and vmw vying to knock rocko off his sandy vagina throne.  maybe we should more aptly rename it the surly vagina award.  don't worry, you're in the running.

so you just typed a couple of lines that proved my point.  you dont believe our government should be involved in funding healthcare or bird research, but you are all for ramping up the staffing and funding of any agency that screens gun registration applications.  you believe in a more thorough screening of gun owner applicants?

there was a great meeting with the president in the white house, bringing in representatives from both sides to talk about the issue, expressing his eagerness to do something about gun violence.  the republicans there had great ideas.  trump said send me a bill i can sign. they all went back to their desk and threw their ideas in the trash.  been quiet as a churchmouse ever since.   mum's the word.  the president and his empty words that come out of his lying mouth.  so he chickened out then, reversed his stance after a closed door meeting with the nra, and now his stance is we dont need no stinkin gun control, what we need is to keep guns out of bad peoples hands.  that's now the big idea.  so how?  oh, there are no ideas behind it.  nothing pending.  no actions, no ideas how we go about doing that.  so while your president dreams of golden showers instead of gun control, what ideas do you have, mr mags, as to how we come guns out of the hands of bad people?

 

Oh no. The government protects the citizenry. That is their main fucking job. They failed to do it in both Texas and Parkland. How fucking hard is it to comprehend simply typing in information into a system that would have prevented both shooters from getting guns? This isn't a monetary issue, but I give you points trying to conflate the two together. It's fucking retarded, which is why you did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 758
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Swam@Texas
Swam@Texas

Was that thing where the kids who'll see how many Tide pods they can eat suddenly became experts on the Founders' intentions in crafting the Second Amendment?

Swam@Texas
Swam@Texas

The greatest thing I've seen is (Not A Crisis Actor) David Hogg whining about losing his First Amendment rights by having to have a -- brace yourselves -- clear backpack at school. He's OK with

Heavy 6
Heavy 6

Fuck you gun grabbing commie fascist nazi whore cunts.

Posted Images

thrillhammer

thrillhammer 684

Posted
Posted

typical deflection.  your grades suck so your feelings towards guns are invalid.   see, these arent high schoolers, the average age of the marchers is 40+.  so their opinions about guns are invalid.  ha ha,  you obviously dont know the difference between an automatic weapon and a semi-automatic weapon. you idiot.  so therefore your feelings that we need to do something about gun violence is invalid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 14,691

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, thrillhammer said:

typical deflection.  your grades suck so your feelings towards guns are invalid.   see, these arent high schoolers, the average age of the marchers is 40+.  so their opinions about guns are invalid.  ha ha,  you obviously dont know the difference between an automatic weapon and a semi-automatic weapon. you idiot.  so therefore your feelings that we need to do something about gun violence is invalid.

Now I understand why you are a retard on this subject. You want to apply feelings to a fact based discussion. Feelings make for horrible policy decisions, which is why the Framers made it difficult to change things.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottsins

scottsins 1,966

Posted
Posted
Which gun laws were broken in the last few shootings?
I remember the Texas church shooter was thrown out of the Air Force for mental problems yet he legally bought an assault rifle.  The Orlando nightclub was on a no fly list and did the same.


I’m sure someone has covered this, but the Church shooter’s purchase was not at all legal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottsins

scottsins 1,966

Posted
Posted
What law was broken in the purchase of the firearm?

 

His court martial for domestic violence prohibited him from purchasing, possessing or transferring a firearm, under the “Lautenberg amendment”.

 

The purchase “happened” because the military did not report the information to the appropriate database.

 

ETA: Please don’t infer any larger point to my posts. I’m just addressing the narrow question of whether current les were followed or not for this one particular incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 14,691

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, scottsins said:

 


His court martial for domestic violence prohibited him from purchasing, possessing or transferring a firearm, under the “Lautenberg amendment”.

The purchase “happened” because the military did not report the information to the appropriate database.

 

Yes. So the federal government didn't do its job.

Edited by HtownHorn
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14,598

Posted
Posted

What did the NRA do to make sure people committed of domestic violence (Lautenberg amendment) weren't able to buy guns?  Did they support laws that shared information between states?  Did they support a national database?

Also, what was done to stop people on no fly lists from buying guns?  Did the NRA support any initiate that did that?

If not, why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 14,691

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

What did the NRA do to make sure people committed of domestic violence (Lautenberg amendment) weren't able to buy guns?  Did they support laws that shared information between states?  Did they support a national database?

Also, what was done to stop people on no fly lists from buying guns?  Did the NRA support any initiate that did that?

If not, why not?

The no fly list also contains people that shouldn't be on it. It's another failure of the government that they can't even put the right people on it.

Not sure what you mean by national database, if you mean a gun registry, fuck that shit. 

If only there was already a database set up to report/prevent violent offenders from buying weapons.

Did the Air Force properly enter the data into NICS or not? Here is some reading to help you out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/us/air-force-devin-kelley-gunman-texas.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/politics/us-military-crime-database-flaws-texas-church-shooting/index.html

https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Air-Force-admits-it-failed-to-send-Sutherland-12389371.php

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/texas-church-shooting/air-force-failed-report-texas-church-gunman-devin-kelley-s-n818156

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/11/06/the-air-force-says-it-failed-to-follow-procedures-allowing-texas-church-shooter-to-obtain-firearms/?utm_term=.af2571cd6571

Edited by HtownHorn
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
formermav43

formermav43 4,606

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

What did the NRA do to make sure people committed of domestic violence (Lautenberg amendment) weren't able to buy guns?  Did they support laws that shared information between states?  Did they support a national database?

Also, what was done to stop people on no fly lists from buying guns?  Did the NRA support any initiate that did that?

If not, why not?

Even staunch gun control advocates should be skeptical of employing the no fly list like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastTexan

EastTexan 662

Posted
Posted
On March 30, 2018 at 12:26 AM, F250 said:

I tried to wade through this cesspool for an interesting exchange of ideas on gun control but...

tumblr_oorucrzkOv1qfcx4to1_540.gif

 

The only exchange the lefty gun grabbers want is just that, "grab all the guns". "Kill the 2nd Amendment"

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ndawg

ndawg 1,242

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, EastTexan said:

 

Because of lefts long held mindset. Can't deny their beliefs.

It's almost like you've never had an actual conversation with someone on the left about gun control.

They can get you to believe anything, can't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastTexan

EastTexan 662

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ndawg said:

It's almost like you've never had an actual conversation with someone on the left about gun control.

They can get you to believe anything, can't they?

 

Cannot avoid the lefty gun grabbers. They're pretty good about getting in your face spouting bs.

 

They are what they are.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5,112

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, EastTexan said:

 

Cannot avoid the lefty gun grabbers. They're pretty good about getting in your face spouting bs.

 

They are what they are.

I’ve managed to go my whole life without ever having a conversation with someone who wants to repeal the 2nd amendment. And I’ve lived in liberal Austin for 27 years. I can’t imagine that there are more liberals trying to take your guns away in East Texas than liberal Austin. Therefore, my hypothesis is that you are lying and you’d rather make up the beliefs of others rather than actually having a real conversation with someone you disagree with. It’s ok if you feel that way, but politics boards would be a better place if you would either engage honestly or shut the fuck up. I don’t expect you to do either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13,205

Posted
Posted
On 3/29/2018 at 10:23 PM, Aqua Buddha said:

What did the NRA do to make sure people committed of domestic violence (Lautenberg amendment) weren't able to buy guns?  Did they support laws that shared information between states?  Did they support a national database?

Nothing. No. No.

The NRA is a disease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastTexan

EastTexan 662

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I’ve managed to go my whole life without ever having a conversation with someone who wants to repeal the 2nd amendment. And I’ve lived in liberal Austin for 27 years. I can’t imagine that there are more liberals trying to take your guns away in East Texas than liberal Austin. Therefore, my hypothesis is that you are lying and you’d rather make up the beliefs of others rather than actually having a real conversation with someone you disagree with. It’s ok if you feel that way, but politics boards would be a better place if you would either engage honestly or shut the fuck up. I don’t expect you to do either. 

 

Honestly, I believe it's the far lefts goal to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Don't care to shut the fuck up as you so eloquently  put it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bernorange

bernorange 8,362

Posted
Posted
Quote

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) on Saturday announced the passage of legislation that would strip all firearms from New Yorkers convicted of domestic violence, updating a previous law that prohibited abusers from owning handguns.

...

The law forces convicted domestic abusers to turn in rifles, shotguns, and any other firearms they were not previously prohibited from owning under a law passed after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, that barred abusers from owning pistols or revolvers.

...

 

http://thehill.com/regulation/381142-new-york-passes-bill-to-restrict-guns-for-domestic-abusers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duckman

Duckman 82

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Just started listening to What a Hell of a Way to Die podcast (two veterans) and was happy to hear I'm not the only person who thinks we need to ban all semi-autos. The podcast is a great listen for those who want to hear a military perspective that isn't reheated FOXNews/InfoWars.

Two people does not = the military.

As for "banning all semi automatics" - so no more semi shotguns for dove season?   No more kids learning to shoot with 10/22's?   No more Glocks?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5,112

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, EastTexan said:

 

Honestly, I believe it's the far lefts goal to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Don't care to shut the fuck up as you so eloquently  put it.

Thanks for proving my point man. I hope you don’t get hay fever with all the straw men you are harboring over there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pacman

pacman 7,357

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, EastTexan said:

 

Honestly, I believe it's the far lefts goal to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Don't care to shut the fuck up as you so eloquently  put it.

As a fellow East Texan, I can tell you this is a common issue. No room for discourse, all justified by some boogeyman theory of the other team. Pick just about any topic, same narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4,815

Posted
Posted

 

Apparently there can be no middle ground.   I do not understand why there can be no compromise over assault type weaponry.   

Here is a prime example of where we are now, the tactics being waged, the bogeyman theory of the right being espoused by Nugent.

Quote

NRA board member and conservative rocker Ted Nugent blasted the survivors of the Parkland school shooting, claiming there is “irrefutable” evidence that “they have no soul.”

During an appearance on The Joe Pags Show, the Republican guitarist described the student gun reform advocates “as mushy brained children who have been fed lies.”

“They’re actually committing spiritual suicide because everything they recommend will cause more death and mayhem,” Nugent continued. “Guaranteed.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ted-nugent-parkland-survivors-mushy-brained-children-article-1.3907005

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bernorange

bernorange 8,362

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

 

Apparently there can be no middle ground.   I do not understand why there can be no compromise over assault type weaponry.

Not trying to be a dick or pendantic, but a discussion is difficult when language is vague. What do you consider a compromise? What do you mean by 'assault style weaponry'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89,686

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, staboner said:

old ted is america'ing really fucking hard there. damn. 

He’s doing his best to make sure more teens get out and vote in November.  

Put more Democrats in Congress, and the NRA can raise more money and Wayne and Co. can get more bonuses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4,815

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, bernorange said:

Not trying to be a dick or pendantic, but a discussion is difficult when language is vague. What do you consider a compromise? What do you mean by 'assault style weaponry'?

I understand.  I grew up in rural Texas.  We carry guns for thing like snakes, nutria and other vermin.  We also carry them for hunting.  Where I grew up most trucks had a gun rack over the back window and a 22 and a shotgun in it (even in the school parking lot).   Some carried larger caliber, but most guns were bolt, pump, breakover or lever action, and pistols were revolvers.  

I don't understand the need for anyone in the public having more than that.   Seems anything more is kept for the intention of shooting other people (either offense or defense).    To me anything beyond single shot per trigger squeeze is overkill.  

I have no problem with being educated on the terms I use, and agree that the language is vague.  Is there a site somewhere that states what is legal and what isn't?  What is legal that can be transformed to illegal rather easily?  Something simple and accepted by all parties?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13,205

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Duckman said:

Two people does not = the military.

As for "banning all semi automatics" - so no more semi shotguns for dove season?   No more kids learning to shoot with 10/22's?   No more Glocks?   

Negating veteran voices? #sad

No semi-autos would mean no semi-autos. Why would branding matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bernorange

bernorange 8,362

Posted
Posted
On 4/1/2018 at 2:59 PM, pyrohornIII said:

...

I have no problem with being educated on the terms I use, and agree that the language is vague.  Is there a site somewhere that states what is legal and what isn't?  What is legal that can be transformed to illegal rather easily?  Something simple and accepted by all parties?

Basically, unless it's regulated under the NFA, it's legal to own and use:

https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-firearms-act-nfa

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15,300

Posted
Posted
Give these loons the bandwidth, they'll usually tell you their true intentions.  DNC Vice Chair suggesting it's time to push the repeal the 2nd.
 
Also echoed by Senator Karen Carter Peterson who re-tweeted an opinion piece from the NYT on repealing the 2nd.
 
But yeah, those crazy, paranoid conservatives.  Clinging to their guns and bibles....
 
Nobody wants to take your guns!  (**cough, cough, repeal....)
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastTexan

EastTexan 662

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:
Give these loons the bandwidth, they'll usually tell you their true intentions.  DNC Vice Chair suggesting it's time to push the repeal the 2nd.
 
Also echoed by Senator Karen Carter Peterson who re-tweeted an opinion piece from the NYT on repealing the 2nd.
 
But yeah, those crazy, paranoid conservatives.  Clinging to their guns and bibles....
 
Nobody wants to take your guns!  (**cough, cough, repeal....)
 

 

Was told recently that the left did not support repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

What's that old saying "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15,300

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, EastTexan said:

 

Was told recently that the left did not support repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

What's that old saying "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile". 

There is no more subterfuge.  They are telling you their intentions plainly.  

"In one of the first speeches, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas senior Delaney Tarr told the crowd of the students’ demands, including background checks and a ban on assault weapons. “When you give us an inch, that bump stocks ban, we will take a mile,”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...