Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on November 09, 2015, 09:48:53 AM
-
Meanwhile, while you were sleeping . . . .
Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=bd85853b-d013-4137-b3e4-330895f24220&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do (Getty Images)
By Greg Richter
Sunday, 08 Nov 2015
In an email sent out over the weekend by the Democratic Party, President Barack Obama urges followers to join him in the effort to enact stricter gun laws.
"We have not gone more than eight days without a mass shooting in this country this year," Obama begins in the email. "That means that each week, more families are grieving, more communities are being pieced back together. As a nation, we're holding everyone affected by these heartbreaking events in our prayers."
But, he adds, prayers aren't enough. The email links to a Democrats.org webpage where recipients can add their name to a petition to support the cause.
Obama says there have been more than 300 mass shootings in the United States so far in 2015, killing nearly 400 and injuring 1,000.
"We can't sweep this problem under the rug, or allow ourselves to become numb to it, or accept that there's nothing we can do because 'stuff happens,'" a reference to a statement by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush after the October Oregon community college shootings.
"Let me be clear about this: Unless we do something – change our politics and change our laws – these painful tragedies will continue," Obama says.
He does not lay out a specific strategy.
Obama says the issue is not about the Second Amendment, but about "commonsense reform measures" the American people want.
Despite his previous attempts at executive actions, Obama says, "I cannot change this by myself.
"I need members of Congress, state legislatures, and governors who will work with me," he says. "And I need people like you to stand up and say that enough is enough."
The president cites such Democratic gains as Obamacare, same-sex marriage and climate change.
"But this is one thing we haven't been able to do," he said. "We have not reformed our gun laws to help reduce the unnecessary deaths we see in this country every single day."
Latest: Assess Your Heart Attack Risk in Minutes Online. Start Here.
But it is not too late, he said, "by making sure we urge future leaders to act where we have been stalled."
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-strict-gun-law/2015/11/08/id/701186/#ixzz3r19nZVWt
-
Ok, I grew up hunting in Oklahoma, have lived in Texas 23 years, and carry a gun almost daily for work. I have zero problem with discussing ways we can make mass shootings less likely. I understand the frustration and the "we've got to do something" mentality. But it's also important to know what that "something" is going to be before I can get upset, or behind it. If it is tightening up AND enforcing existing laws, that's something I'm open to. What I don't understand is the mentality "I don't even want to discuss any issue that has "gun" in it." Or the spewing of hatred from the far right for those who do want to discuss the issue and look for solutions.
-
I don't think the president and his zombie followers are simply talking about ways to make mass shootings less likely. I think they want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns.
-
I don't think the president and his zombie followers are simply talking about ways to make mass shootings less likely. I think they want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns.
I don't think that's the case. Its mostly speaking to your voters who are against guns and or are for more regulation. 'Mass Shooting" is the new flash issue everyone is talking about.
The conclusion that its deliberate actions to "make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns." as if that's the real or sole purpose of it is more propaganda bullshit.
Most people on both sides seem to be open to enforcing regulation better or having some new regulations.
-
Meanwhile, while you were sleeping . . . .
Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=bd85853b-d013-4137-b3e4-330895f24220&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Obama: Gun Control Is 'One Thing' I Still Want to Do (Getty Images)
By Greg Richter
Sunday, 08 Nov 2015
In an email sent out over the weekend by the Democratic Party, President Barack Obama urges followers to join him in the effort to enact stricter gun laws.
"We have not gone more than eight days without a mass shooting in this country this year," Obama begins in the email. "That means that each week, more families are grieving, more communities are being pieced back together. As a nation, we're holding everyone affected by these heartbreaking events in our prayers."
But, he adds, prayers aren't enough. The email links to a Democrats.org webpage where recipients can add their name to a petition to support the cause.
Obama says there have been more than 300 mass shootings in the United States so far in 2015, killing nearly 400 and injuring 1,000.
"We can't sweep this problem under the rug, or allow ourselves to become numb to it, or accept that there's nothing we can do because 'stuff happens,'" a reference to a statement by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush after the October Oregon community college shootings.
"Let me be clear about this: Unless we do something – change our politics and change our laws – these painful tragedies will continue," Obama says.
He does not lay out a specific strategy.
Obama says the issue is not about the Second Amendment, but about "commonsense reform measures" the American people want.
Despite his previous attempts at executive actions, Obama says, "I cannot change this by myself.
"I need members of Congress, state legislatures, and governors who will work with me," he says. "And I need people like you to stand up and say that enough is enough."
The president cites such Democratic gains as Obamacare, same-sex marriage and climate change.
"But this is one thing we haven't been able to do," he said. "We have not reformed our gun laws to help reduce the unnecessary deaths we see in this country every single day."
Latest: Assess Your Heart Attack Risk in Minutes Online. Start Here.
But it is not too late, he said, "by making sure we urge future leaders to act where we have been stalled."
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-strict-gun-law/2015/11/08/id/701186/#ixzz3r19nZVWt
We can start by taking away the his secret service's fire arms while he visits the middle east.....or NY.
-
I don't think the president and his zombie followers are simply talking about ways to make mass shootings less likely. I think they want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns.
I doubt it.
-
I don't think that's the case. Its mostly speaking to your voters who are against guns and or are for more regulation. 'Mass Shooting" is the new flash issue everyone is talking about.
The conclusion that its deliberate actions to "make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns." as if that's the real or sole purpose of it is more propaganda bullshit.
Most people on both sides seem to be open to enforcing regulation better or having some new regulations.
I didn't say it's the sole purpose. But to say that's not part of it is, to borrow a phrase, propaganda BS.
What new regulations have the president and his disciples proposed that will stop mass shootings?
-
I didn't say it's the sole purpose. But to say that's not part of it is, to borrow a phrase, propaganda BS.
What new regulations have the president and his disciples proposed that will stop mass shootings?
I don't think they have. They certainly haven't announced any new regulation to take guns away. Not even sure why the headline contains the words "Gun Control"
-
I didn't say it's the sole purpose. But to say that's not part of it is, to borrow a phrase, propaganda BS.
You didn't say it directly, but you strongly implied it. Your first sentence was a disagreement in what the "purposes were" follow by what you thought the purposes were.
But to say that's not part of it is, to borrow a phrase, propaganda BS.
Adding any new regulation by the default will make it more difficult for a person to own a gun. Just like requiring vehicle insurance. Was it thought that part of mandatory vehicle insurance was to maker it harder for careful drivers to own a car? Kind of a stupid. That's why I called what you said propaganda BS
What new regulations have the president and his disciples proposed that will stop mass shootings?
Don't know if any have been proposed. But i am sure the chicken littles will hurry and hide their guns in the hills with even a mention of one.
-
I don't think the president and his zombie followers are simply talking about ways to make mass shootings less likely. I think they want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns.
Big X2
-
I don't think the president and his zombie followers are simply talking about ways to make mass shootings less likely. I think they want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns.
I think they want to force Betamax formats on us against our will... I think we both have the same amount of evidence for our suspicions.
-
You didn't say it directly, but you strongly implied it. Your first sentence was a disagreement in what the "purposes were" follow by what you thought the purposes were.
Adding any new regulation by the default will make it more difficult for a person to own a gun. Just like requiring vehicle insurance. Was it thought that part of mandatory vehicle insurance was to maker it harder for careful drivers to own a car? Kind of a stupid. That's why I called what you said propaganda BS
Don't know if any have been proposed. But i am sure the chicken littles will hurry and hide their guns in the hills with even a mention of one.
I wasn't strongly implying anything other than what I explicitly said. I'm sure part of their motivation is to stop mass shootings. I have a good friend who is an anti-gun zealot. She is motivated in part by her desire to end violence. She also doesn't have a problem with regulation that adversely affects law abiding citizens.
Take a look at the president's comments immediately after a mass killing, before the facts come in. He immediately talks about gun control. And when it turns out the shooter obtained the gun or guns legally, then what? I certainly don't trust his motives.
-
I think they want to force Betamax formats on us against our will... I think we both have the same amount of evidence for our suspicions.
Or not.
-
We can start by taking away the his secret service's fire arms while he visits the middle east.....or NY.
Or Chicago. Detroit.
-
I think they want to force Betamax formats on us against our will... I think we both have the same amount of evidence for our suspicions.
Talk about saying stuff without evidence, how about the CiC saying something so hopelessly stupid as to pretend to promise we can legislate an end to people being violent with guns:
"Let me be clear about this: Unless we do something – change our politics and change our laws – these painful tragedies will continue," Obama says.
And when he says "I can't change this myself" we need to count our blessings, because he would be a dictator in a NY minute if he could. He would change it with the stroke of a pen, right this minute.
He's a horrible excuse for an American.
-
I wasn't strongly implying anything other than what I explicitly said.
Your post structure was: They are not doing "A" they are doing "B" You may have not meant that, but that's what you did say.
I'm sure part of their motivation is to stop mass shootings. I have a good friend who is an anti-gun zealot. She is motivated in part by her desire to end violence. She also doesn't have a problem with regulation that adversely affects law abiding citizens.
So that one friend of yours exactly exemplifies everyone's else's intentions? is that why you implied that's the intention? There is a percantage of people who would like to see the no guns at all. But they are not representative of the majority of people.
Take a look at the president's comments immediately after a mass killing, before the facts come in. He immediately talks talking about gun control. And when it turns out the shooter obtained the gun or guns legally, then what? I certainly don't trust his motives.
Welcome to politics. Specifically getting out in front of the public immediately after a tragedy. The gall of some politicians!
-
Your post structure was: They are not doing "A" they are doing "B" You may have not meant that, but that's what you did say.
So that one friend of yours exactly exemplifies everyone's else's intentions? is that why you implied that's the intention? There is a percantage of people who would like to see the no guns at all. But they are not representative of the majority of people.
Welcome to politics. Specifically getting out in front of the public immediately after a tragedy. The gall of some politicians!
You can argue about what I said and intended. I already clarified it.
My one friend is representative of many other friends and acquaintances and politicians. I also didn't say she, the president, or his disciples want to see no guns at all. Didn't imply it either. :)
Getting out in front of an issue is one thing. Using it to score cheap political points, promoting something that would not have prevented the tragedy is another. But you are missing the point: the fact he immediately starts talking gun control without knowing the facts is evidence that he isn't purely trying to stop gun violence, without adversely affecting law abiding gun owners.
-
You can argue about what I said and intended. I already clarified it.
My one friend is representative of many other friends and acquaintances and politicians. I also didn't say she, the president, or his disciples want to see no guns at all. Didn't imply it either. :)
Getting out in front of an issue is one thing. Using it to score cheap political points, promoting something that would not have prevented the tragedy is another. But you are missing the point: the fact he immediately starts talking gun control without knowing the facts is evidence that he isn't purely trying to stop gun violence, without adversely affecting law abiding gun owners.
Hooks all the many ppl who couldn't give a rat's ass less about facts, themselves.
-
Hooks all the many ppl who couldn't give a rat's ass less about facts, themselves.
Happens way too often, unfortunately.
-
You can argue about what I said and intended. I already clarified it.
No you didn't.
My one friend is representative of many other friends and acquaintances and politicians. I also didn't say she, the president, or his disciples want to see no guns at all. Didn't imply it either. :)
But not of the majority of people.
Getting out in front of an issue is one thing. Using it to score cheap political points, promoting something that would not have prevented the tragedy is another.
What was he promoting?
Event then, in the after math of a tragic event hot air ensues. Some eat it up, some complain.
But you are missing the point: the fact he immediately starts talking gun control without knowing the facts is evidence that he isn't purely trying to stop gun violence, without adversely affecting law abiding gun owners.
And how exactly is he affecting lawful gun owners?
-
Happens way too often, unfortunately.
Works like a dream, I'm sure. Disgraceful for Obama to engage in that sort of behavior, and it's nothing less than an outrage that he gets away with it.
-
I have to wonder. What's the GOP and conservatives stance/solution on mass shootings? Do they have a stance? do they think there is a problem?
Or is this all conservatives do? Whine about Obama says? Whine about what so anti-gun clown says? Play chicken little? Play idiot CT-er?
-
I'll stake my position and its intractable....not an inch..not one fucking inch on guns ever for any reason. Enforce the laws that are there. No machine guns have been used in any mass shootings so we can stop with the military style bullshit and semi auto shit. I don't have a class three and at this point don't want one. I'd like a suppressor but a grand for a round chunk of metal I'll use maybe twice a year..sorry. Your are blind if you think they want common sense reform...which is what by the way? What laws need to be put on the books that aren't there now. Gun shows...hmmmm I seem to remember getting a check done at one, along with the ATF Nazi's checking ID's. I'm going to a huge one this weekend, I'll let you know. Anyway mental health is a separate issue from this. I've purchased two guns this month...you planning on limiting that Barry....I know he'd love to start there. Or ID for ammo or a database...nope sorry not one fucking inch on this.
-
I have to wonder. What's the GOP and conservatives stance/solution on mass shootings? Do they have a stance? do they think there is a problem?
Or is this all conservatives do? Whine about Obama says? Whine about what so anti-gun clown says? Play chicken little? Play idiot CT-er?
Nope no problem....I'm fully sure the effete left want my guns....they can come and try. I think pajama boy would look good with a 5.56 round through his fucking head. Sorry O...not an inch.
-
No you didn't.
But not of the majority of people.
What was he promoting?
Event then, in the after math of a tragic event hot air ensues. Some eat it up, some complain.
And how exactly is he affecting lawful gun owners?
If he is talking about gun control before the facts come in, and the facts routinely do not support the notion that "stricter gun control laws" would have prevented the killing, then he must be talking about a policy change that will hurt law abiding gun owners.
For example, the last shooting where he admitted making the issue "political" and made vague comments about doing something does nothing but create questions in my mind about his motives. And I'm not some card-carrying NRA member. I don't trust him.
What, specifically, are we going to do to stop mass shooters who are mentally competent law abiding citizens, without adversely affecting all gun owners?
-
You can't....what limit mags...ok fine I can dump a 7-10 round mag and change and be back on target with a pistol in under 2 seconds. Watch somebody who's good...I'm not even fast. Some wack job can practice for a few days and that won't be an issue. The warning signs for some of these people were there..and then we have the terror attacks which seem to get lumped in. Make no mistake Obama and the left would love to shitcan the 2nd amendment.
-
If he is talking about gun control before the facts come in,
You said that several times now. i got it the first time. You seem to be stuck on it. yes i get it, he did a politics move. "...call the police there's mad man in town!" the sky is falling.
and the facts routinely do not support the notion that "stricter gun control laws" would have prevented the killing, then he must be talking about a policy change that will hurt law abiding gun owners.
So its definitely "either or" and you know for sure what he's thinking? What exact policy change has he proposed?
For example, the last shooting where he admitted making the issue "political" and made vague comments about doing something does nothing but create questions in my mind about his motives. And I'm not some card-carrying NRA member. I don't trust him.
So you are questioning his motives and deciding what they are at the same time? And you are doing this without a proposed policy or a proposed law before congress? Meanwhile according the brady campaign on gun control OB received and "F".
What, specifically, are we going to do to stop mass shooters who are mentally competent law abiding citizens, without adversely affecting all gun owners?
So basically you are going to whine about what OB says, not propose any solutions and speculate about his motives. Got it.
Had it right here a few posts ago:
I have to wonder. What's the GOP and conservatives stance/solution on mass shootings? Do they have a stance? do they think there is a problem?
Or is this all conservatives do? Whine about Obama says? Whine about what so anti-gun clown says? Play chicken little? Play idiot CT-er?
Any regulation will make it harder for law abiding people to own guns. And it will HURT THEM!!!!!!!! Just like a driver's test, driver's education, insurance etc...
Just like a fork lift license, OMFG!!!!!!!!!! we made it harder for the competent law abiding fork lift operators to operate a fork lift. THIS IS TYRANNY!!!!!!!!!!!!
OBAMA is the kenyan satan!!!!!!!!!
JFC, the conservative whiny song and dance is so old.
-
I'll stake my position and its intractable....not an inch..not one fucking inch on guns ever for any reason. Enforce the laws that are there. No machine guns have been used in any mass shootings so we can stop with the military style bullshit and semi auto shit. I don't have a class three and at this point don't want one. I'd like a suppressor but a grand for a round chunk of metal I'll use maybe twice a year..sorry. Your are blind if you think they want common sense reform...which is what by the way? What laws need to be put on the books that aren't there now. Gun shows...hmmmm I seem to remember getting a check done at one, along with the ATF Nazi's checking ID's. I'm going to a huge one this weekend, I'll let you know. Anyway mental health is a separate issue from this. I've purchased two guns this month...you planning on limiting that Barry....I know he'd love to start there. Or ID for ammo or a database...nope sorry not one fucking inch on this.
Are machine guns legal?
-
You can't....what limit mags...ok fine I can dump a 7-10 round mag and change and be back on target with a pistol in under 2 seconds. Watch somebody who's good...I'm not even fast. Some wack job can practice for a few days and that won't be an issue. The warning signs for some of these people were there..and then we have the terror attacks which seem to get lumped in. Make no mistake Obama and the left would love to shitcan the 2nd amendment.
I agree, mag limits won't change anything.
-
You said that several times now. i got it the first time. You seem to be stuck on it. yes i get it, he did a politics move. "...call the police there's mad man in town!" the sky is falling.
So its definitely "either or" and you know for sure what he's thinking? What exact policy change has he proposed?
So you are questioning his motives and deciding what they are at the same time? And you are doing this without a proposed policy or a proposed law before congress?
So basically you are going to whine about what OB says, not propose and any solutions and speculate about his motives. Got it.
Had it right here a few posts ago:
Any regulation will make it harder for law abiding people to own guns. Just like a driver's test, driver's education, insurance etc...
Just like a fork lift license, OMFG!!!!!!!!!! we made it harder for the competent law abiding fork lift operators to operate a fork lift. THIS IS TYRANNY!!!!!!!!!!!!
OBAMA is the kenyan satan!!!!!!!!!
JFC, the conservative whiny song and dance is so old.
You get it? Are you sure? Because after you said I "strongly implied" something, I correct you, you still make the same comment. I'm not sure you actually get it.
No, the sky isn't falling. Nobody is whining. That's just hyperbole. Doesn't help make whatever point you're trying to make. Just offering an opinion.
BTW, what is your point? That there is no way the president or his minions will do anything to adversely affect law abiding gun owners?
-
You get it? Are you sure? Because after you said I "strongly implied" something, I correct you, you still make the same comment. I'm not sure you actually get it.
You strongly implied that that's not about preventing mass shooting but instead making it harder for law abiding peeps to own guns. And you did it like cheap 2-bit propaganda minister especially in trying to deny it. That's indisputable. Had you put the "also" in your second sentence it would have changed the complete meaning. "I think they ALSO want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns."
No, the sky isn't falling. Nobody is whining. That's just hyperbole. Doesn't help make whatever point you're trying to make. Just offering an opinion.
No, you are whining, just like most conservatives... nit picking and Bitching about proposed policies that do not exist and unwilling to address the issue of mass shootings.
BTW, what is your point? That there is no way the president or his minions will do anything to adversely affect law abiding gun owners?
1. You served up BS propaganda. I called you on it. Get over it.
2. You believe that he wants to "hurt" gun owners, based on him being a politician and speaking after a tragedy without facts. And you believe this without any proposed policy and ignore his track record on gun control.
3. All conservatives seem to do is whine about OB these and provide very little solutions to anything. (not finished with this point, as I am sure there are some good solutions out there from Conservatives, but i can't seem to hear because of all the crying)
4. now you are making a attempt to change the course of the debate into something else by putting me on the defensive trying to get me to defend "That there is no way the president or his minions will do anything to adversely affect law abiding gun owners?" more BS.
Fork lift certification........Tyr anny in action!!!!!
-
You strongly implied that that's not about preventing mass shooting but instead making it harder for law abiding peeps to own guns. And you did it like cheap 2-bit propaganda minister especially in trying to deny it. That's indisputable. Had you put the "also" in your second sentence it would have changed the complete meaning. "I think they ALSO want to make it harder for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns."
No, you are whining, just like most conservatives... nit picking and Bitching about proposed policies that do not exist and unwilling to address the issue of mass shootings.
1. You served up BS propaganda. I called you on it. Get over it.
2. You believe that he wants to "hurt" gun owners, based on him being a politician and speaking after a tragedy without facts. And you believe this without any proposed policy and ignore his track record on gun control.
3. All conservatives seem to do is whine about OB these and provide very little solutions to anything. (not finished with this point, as I am sure there are some good solutions out there from Conservatives, but i can't seem to hear because of all the crying)
4. now you are making a attempt to change the course of the debate into something else.
lol. No, you clearly don't get it. Now YOU quit yer whining when I repeat something, since that California smog is clearly clogging your brain. :)
So you got nothing? You just want to talk stink about people who do have an opinion, but are unable to offer one of your own. No worries. All comments are welcome.
-
lol. No, you clearly don't get it. Now YOU quit yer whining when I repeat something, since that California smog is clearly clogging your brain. :)
So you got nothing? You just want to talk stink about people who do have an opinion, but are unable to offer one of your own. No worries. All comments are welcome.
Haha, fresh liberal no-whining air here. Thanks to emission regulations that made it harder for law abiding drivers to drive their cars. The Tyranny!!!!!! ( i bet conservatives bitched like little sissy boys when emission control, smogs certs and such were increased in cali)
I got nothing what????
I have no problem with people's opinion but i do delight in pointing straight up BULL SHIT (sound out the words "bull shit" with a southern drawl) when i see it. And this has been a fairly delightful time. thank you sirrrrrrr. ;)
-
I swear, the whole gun control BS is almost as bad the dems illegal Immigration campaign.
-
Haha, fresh liberal no-whining air here. Thanks to emission regulations that made it harder for law abiding drivers to drive their cars. The Tyranny!!!!!! ( i bet conservatives bitched like little sissy boys when emission control, smogs certs and such were increased in cali)
I got nothing what????
I have no problem with people's opinion but i do delight in pointing straight up BULL SHIT (sound out the words "bull shit" with a southern drawl) when i see it. And this has been a fairly delightful time. thank you sirrrrrrr. ;)
Have all those emissions controls actually improved your air quality?
I'm asking you what restrictions you believe can be imposed on mentally competent, law abiding citizens that will not adversely impact law abiding gun owners?
-
240: Jessica Albo Is 'One Girl' I Still Want to Do
Equally realistic and possible.
-
Have all those emissions controls actually improved your air quality?
yes.
I'm asking you what restrictions you believe can be imposed on mentally competent, law abiding citizens that will not adversely impact law abiding gun owners?
I know you are asking me that. i have asked you a few questions that you have dodged. Answer those first and i will be happy to answer that for you.
in case your short term memory is acting up:
Was it thought that part of mandatory vehicle insurance was to maker it harder for careful drivers to own a car?
What was he promoting?
And how exactly is he affecting lawful gun owners?
What's the GOP and conservatives stance/solution on mass shootings? Do they have a stance? do they think there is a problem? (count these as me asking you too)
So its definitely "either or" and you know for sure what he's thinking?
What exact policy change has he proposed?
So you are questioning his motives and deciding what they are at the same time?
And you are doing this without a proposed policy or a proposed law before congress?
I got nothing what?
I have no problems when someone avoids a question, (its telling) but don't dodge this many and expect me to answer your question. :D
-
yes.
I know you are asking me that. i have asked you a few questions that you have dodged. Answer those first and i will be happy to answer that for you.
in case your short term memory is acting up:
Was it thought that part of mandatory vehicle insurance was to maker it harder for careful drivers to own a car?
What was he promoting?
And how exactly is he affecting lawful gun owners?
What's the GOP and conservatives stance/solution on mass shootings? Do they have a stance? do they think there is a problem? (count these as me asking you too)
So its definitely "either or" and you know for sure what he's thinking?
What exact policy change has he proposed?
So you are questioning his motives and deciding what they are at the same time?
And you are doing this without a proposed policy or a proposed law before congress?
I got nothing what?
I have no problems when someone avoids a question, (its telling) but don't dodge this many and expect me to answer your question. :D
Dude you asked 11 questions. You must be on crack. lol You pick one and I'll answer, then you answer mine.
-
Dude you asked 11 questions. You must be on crack. lol You pick one and I'll answer, then you answer mine.
Its not my fault you didn't answer them.
You should have done me the courtesy of answering them when i asked them. Don't act like a liberal, be accountable.
Think of it like eating an elephant.......one bite at a time.
;D
Seriously though, tell me what you think should be done about these mass shootings and i will tell what i think.
-
240: Jessica Albo Is 'One Girl' I Still Want to Do
Equally realistic and possible.
Albo?
is that her porn double?
-
Albo?
is that her porn double?
She's an albino version of the movie star.
-
She's an albino version of the movie star.
heheh cool
-
Its not my fault you didn't answer them.
You should have done me the courtesy of answering them when i asked them. Don't act like a liberal, be accountable.
Think of it like eating an elephant.......one bite at a time.
;D
Seriously though, tell me what you think should be done about these mass shootings and i will tell what i think.
lol Ok. I think we need to enforce the laws we have on the books. I think we need to look at easing reporting restrictions imposed on treating professionals that will allow them to alert authorities if they believe their patients are a danger to society. Individual states, cities, and counties should look at providing armed security personnel on public property.
Other than that, I'm not sure there is anything we could have done to prevent the most recent shootings without restricting lawful gun owners from purchasing and/or owning firearms.
Now I'm asking you what restrictions you believe can be imposed on mentally competent, law abiding citizens that will not adversely impact law abiding gun owners?
-
lol Ok. I think we need to enforce the laws we have on the books. I think we need to look at easing reporting restrictions imposed on treating professionals that will allow them to alert authorities if they believe their patients are a danger to society. Individual states, cities, and counties should look at providing armed security personnel on public property.
Other than that, I'm not sure there is anything we could have done to prevent the most recent shootings without restricting lawful gun owners from purchasing and/or owning firearms.
Now I'm asking you what restrictions you believe can be imposed on mentally competent, law abiding citizens that will not adversely impact law abiding gun owners?
I agree with the things you suggested and agree mass shootings can't all be prevented.
I am considering these (relevant to trying to prevent mass shootings) but haven't fully thought them out:
- BG checks on all firearm purchases... Violent felonies such as armed robbery, domestic violence with a firearm and murder makes it so that your right to own a gun is forfeit indefinitely or a predetermined period.
- Some sort of BG check for mental health
- if they are on certain Mental meds
My daughter goes to college here in California. The day before Halloween they had a lock down because the college security force was alerted to a gunman on campus. She called me locked in from the library. It turned out to be a mistaken costume.
I think this is a heavily spun issue. The connection of gun laws such as mag limits, safety classes, registration, to mass shootings is as invalid as refuges and immigration is to illegal immigration. But yet both are being used the same way with propaganda.
-
I agree with the things you suggested and agree mass shootings can't all be prevented.
I am considering these (relevant to trying to prevent mass shootings) but haven't fully thought them out:
- BG checks on all firearm purchases... Violent felonies such as armed robbery, domestic violence with a firearm and murder makes it so that your right to own a gun is forfeit indefinitely or a predetermined period.
- Some sort of BG check for mental health
- if they are on certain Mental meds
My daughter goes to college here in California. The day before Halloween they had a lock down because the college security force was alerted to a gunman on campus. She called me locked in from the library. It turned out to be a mistaken costume.
I think this is a heavily spun issue. The connection of gun laws such as mag limits, safety classes, registration, to mass shootings is as invalid as refuges and immigration is to illegal immigration. But yet both are being used the same way with propaganda.
I'm open to some of this. I don't have a problem with background checks. I do see problems with mental health and meds checks. It sounds reasonable, but I'm not sure how you enforce it without unnecessarily infringing on a lot of people.
There is spin on both sides, although I'm less trustful of the president. I don't blame gun owners at all for being paranoid.
-
Oz would you consider a ban on "assault weapons" something that prevents law abiding citizens from owning guns?
-
I'm open to some of this. I don't have a problem with background checks. I do see problems with mental health and meds checks. It sounds reasonable, but I'm not sure how you enforce it without unnecessarily infringing on a lot of people.
There is spin on both sides, although I'm less trustful of the president. I don't blame gun owners at all for being paranoid.
I do blame them. Talking heads, op eds, and politicians are using this fear and hand feeding it to conservatives. The problems is that its not real. Very little has been actually done. But what's getting seen is conservatives paranoid about gun laws in the aftermath of these mass shootings. Its turns people off to the general conservative message.
What the masses aren't seeing are conservatives leading the charge on practical reform to help prevent mass shootings. That approach would help the country so much in other areas too.
Instead they are all freaked out about what Hillary said and bitching about liberals.
-
I do blame them. Talking heads, op eds, and politicians are using this fear and hand feeding it to conservatives. The problems is that its not real. Very little has been actually done. But what's getting seen is conservatives paranoid about gun laws in the aftermath of these mass shootings. Its turns people off to the general conservative message.
What the masses aren't seeing are conservatives leading the charge on practical reform to help prevent mass shootings. That approach would help the country so much in other areas too.
Instead they are all freaked out about what Hillary said and bitching about liberals.
what legislation do you think would help prevent mass shootings oz?
-
Oz would you consider a ban on "assault weapons" something that prevents law abiding citizens from owning guns?
I am not a gun owner. Are they banned? I hear they were, then they weren't, etc. what constitutes an assault weapon?
I am pro 2nd amendment. I don't know enough about all the assault weapons we can have or that are available. I don't think a fully automatic S.A.W. should be legal or at the very least, there should be a lots of regulation on it. But a AR-15 should be ok. A Barrett .50 cal should be ok.
-
what legislation do you think would help prevent mass shootings oz?
read up ^^^^
-
read up ^^^^
no time, repost
-
I do blame them. Talking heads, op eds, and politicians are using this fear and hand feeding it to conservatives. The problems is that its not real. Very little has been actually done. But what's getting seen is conservatives paranoid about gun laws in the aftermath of these mass shootings. Its turns people off to the general conservative message.
What the masses aren't seeing are conservatives leading the charge on practical reform to help prevent mass shootings. That approach would help the country so much in other areas too.
Instead they are all freaked out about what Hillary said and bitching about liberals.
I think their concerns are legit. It's one thing to have various factions or members of Congress talking about gun control and citing false statistics in the aftermath of shootings. Quite another for the president to do so.
Maybe you're not seeing masses of conservatives leading the charge on "practical reform," because they believe the laws on the books should be enforced and they see the same kinds of problems that many reasonable people see with effectively trying to disarm segments of the population. And maybe their fears have not been realized because they have effectively lobbied to prevent laws from being passed that would not prevent mass shootings, but would interfere with the Second Amendment rights of many.
Overall, I would not dismiss their concerns as cavalierly as you have.
-
no time, repost
dude it was the 2 posts (BB and mine) right above the post you first posted lol.
-
I think their concerns are legit. It's one thing to have various factions or members of Congress talking about gun control and citing false statistics in the aftermath of shootings. Quite another for the president to do so.
OB is a whore just like any. he can talk all he wants, until he actually does something, there really isn't too much to worry about. I think he also understands that there isn't much you can do, and most of what people seems to suggest wouldn't prevent mass shootings in any way.
Maybe you're not seeing masses of conservatives leading the charge on "practical reform," because they believe the laws on the books should be enforced and they see the same kinds of problems that many reasonable people see with effectively trying to disarm segments of the population. And maybe their fears have not been realized because they have effectively lobbied to prevent laws from being passed that would not prevent mass shootings, but would interfere with the Second Amendment rights of many.
Whatever the case is their message isn't getting out. they need to repackage it.
Overall, I would not dismiss their concerns as cavalierly as you have.
I do, i think its ridiculous. Now that may change soon. but for now, this is what i think.
-
dude it was the 2 posts (BB and mine) right above the post you first posted lol.
thanks, but you didnt mention an "assault weapons" ban anywhere in the post though
would you consider a proposal to ban "assault weapons" an effort to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns?
-
OB is a whore just like any. he can talk all he wants, until he actually does something, there really isn't too much to worry about. I think he also understands that there isn't much you can do, and most of what people seems to suggest wouldn't prevent mass shootings in any way.
Whatever the case is their message isn't getting out. they need to repackage it.
I do, i think its ridiculous. Now that may change soon. but for now, this is what i think.
Better to deal with him before he acts. He has already shown he's willing to issue unconstitutional executive orders, so he's not all hat and no cattle when it comes to taking inappropriate action. I suspect we will see some kind of totally improper EO before he leaves office, because he is a lousy leader and cannot work with Congress to get things done the right way.
-
I agree, mag limits won't change anything.
you agree mag limits wont change anything but youre for them? does that make sense to you?
-
I am not a gun owner. Are they banned? I hear they were, then they weren't, etc. what constitutes an assault weapon?
I am pro 2nd amendment. I don't know enough about all the assault weapons we can have or that are available. I don't think a fully automatic S.A.W. should be legal or at the very least, there should be a lots of regulation on it. But a AR-15 should be ok. A Barrett .50 cal should be ok.
sorry didnt see this earlier, you tell me what an "assault weapon" is the definition changes with the whims of those that want to ban them.
you say an AR should be ok but obama has backed legislation to ban them, he has lobbied democrats in congress to vote on a bill banning them, his own proposal bans them...is that an attempt to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns
-
I am not a gun owner. Are they banned? I hear they were, then they weren't, etc. what constitutes an assault weapon?
I am pro 2nd amendment. I don't know enough about all the assault weapons we can have or that are available. I don't think a fully automatic S.A.W. should be legal or at the very least, there should be a lots of regulation on it. But a AR-15 should be ok. A Barrett .50 cal should be ok.
Sooo..yeah you can own a Barret. I think the company is in New Jersey as a matter of fact. You can own a Saw...with a class 3 license....50 Machine guns...mini guns etc etc with the proper class3..Class 3 licenses are expensive as hell and take a long time to get but you can get them. Honestly I wouldn't get one other then if I got ahold of an MP 40 or MP 44... Look up Knob Creek machine gun shoot in Ky on YouTube. All that shit is legal bud....flame throwers..mini guns on trucks etc. People who have over 200k in a mini gun mounted on a truck don't shoot up schools.
-
I am not a gun owner.
I hate to say it Oz but its pretty obvious youre not a gun owner, I believe in another thread you said something like "barrel clip" when I think you meant banana clip.
Do you think that the fact that you arent personally effected by any potential gun legislation limiting the rights of law abiding citizens makes you less apt to be against gun control legislation or see them as encroachment on youre rights as a law abiding citizen?
-
Oz would you consider a ban on "assault weapons" something that prevents law abiding citizens from owning guns?
look, maybe ben carson was right when he said we shouldn't allow semi-automatic weapons in cities. In the country, that's fine, but no, not in cities.
he's the GOP frontrunner. I think we should respect his feelings on this issue.
-
look, maybe ben carson was right when he said we shouldn't allow semi-automatic weapons in cities. In the country, that's fine, but no, not in cities.
he's the GOP frontrunner. I think we should respect his feelings on this issue.
apparently for you it doesnt matter what someone wants so please excuse yourself from the conversation until that time
-
thanks, but you didnt mention an "assault weapons" ban anywhere in the post though
would you consider a proposal to ban "assault weapons" an effort to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns?
That's why I need a definition. Or just give me some examples like I did.
-
you agree mag limits wont change anything but youre for them? does that make sense to you?
I am for mag limits?
-
sorry didnt see this earlier, you tell me what an "assault weapon" is the definition changes with the whims of those that want to ban them.
you say an AR should be ok but obama has backed legislation to ban them, he has lobbied democrats in congress to vote on a bill banning them, his own proposal bans them...is that an attempt to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns
Which ones are banned? Has a ban been passed?
-
I hate to say it Oz but its pretty obvious youre not a gun owner, I believe in another thread you said something like "barrel clip" when I think you meant banana clip.
Do you think that the fact that you arent personally effected by any potential gun legislation limiting the rights of law abiding citizens makes you less apt to be against gun control legislation or see them as encroachment on youre rights as a law abiding citizen?
Was never trying to pretend I was a gun owner. My point is, and I asked you and others on the other thread, exactly what legislation? Or are we talking about political blabber again?
I prefer to worry about things that are actually happening. Would a politicians stance on gun control prevent me from voting for them? It could. But I am not going to fall prey to BS
-
Sooo..yeah you can own a Barret. I think the company is in New Jersey as a matter of fact. You can own a Saw...with a class 3 license....50 Machine guns...mini guns etc etc with the proper class3..Class 3 licenses are expensive as hell and take a long time to get but you can get them. Honestly I wouldn't get one other then if I got ahold of an MP 40 or MP 44... Look up Knob Creek machine gun shoot in Ky on YouTube. All that shit is legal bud....flame throwers..mini guns on trucks etc. People who have over 200k in a mini gun mounted on a truck don't shoot up schools.
Didn't know any of that. Then why is everyone acting like chicken little?
I would love to shoot some of those guns!
-
Which ones are banned? Has a ban been passed?
I just threw all my guns in the river the minute Obama won Ohio back in 2008.
I knew from getbig, that it'd just be a matter of time until obama took my guns.
All kidding aside, I couldn't buy a 15 round glock mag under bush. I can buy one under obama.
-
Gun companies love Obama. Sales have sky rocket since he took over. Google it. Chicken little marketing works.
-
I just threw all my guns in the river the minute Obama won Ohio back in 2008.
I knew from getbig, that it'd just be a matter of time until obama took my guns.
All kidding aside, I couldn't buy a 15 round glock mag under bush. I can buy one under obama.
Lol.
-
Didn't know any of that. Then why is everyone acting like chicken little?
I would love to shoot some of those guns!
At Knob Creek you can shoot everything....and they've had people get fucked up. Its the biggest greatest collection of weapons, rednecks and white people in the history of man. They have a guy who has the front of a Cobra gunship mounted on a small flatbed truck...just the front and the tri barrel gun..and for like a 100 bucks you can fire it. They have quad 50's ...mini guns...a machine gun course you walk and shoot with the targets that explode...
But the point is all those scary guns..none of that is ever used in a shooting. Its always pistols..and they media always says semi auto pistol...which is the same as a goodam musket except it has a magazine and allows you to fire quicker. One pull...one shot...semi auto does not mean auto. Yup they have auto pistols...class 3 license, very expensive and hard to find...and I don't see the point. There are mag limits by state and you can't get the online folks to ship to you in those states. You can buy guns online but the only thing you do is pay for the weapon. Then they ship to the gun store of your choice and that store runs your 4473. I just did this for a STG 44 .22 replica. It was very quick.
-
At Knob Creek you can shoot everything....and they've had people get fucked up. Its the biggest greatest collection of weapons, rednecks and white people in the history of man. They have a guy who has the front of a Cobra gunship mounted on a small flatbed truck...just the front and the tri barrel gun..and for like a 100 bucks you can fire it. They have quad 50's ...mini guns...a machine gun course you walk and shoot with the targets that explode...
But the point is all those scary guns..none of that is ever used in a shooting. Its always pistols..and they media always says semi auto pistol...which is the same as a goodam musket except it has a magazine and allows you to fire quicker. One pull...one shot...semi auto does not mean auto. Yup they have auto pistols...class 3 license, very expensive and hard to find...and I don't see the point. There are mag limits by state and you can't get the online folks to ship to you in those states. You can buy guns online but the only thing you do is pay for the weapon. Then they ship to the gun store of your choice and that store runs your 4473. I just did this for a STG 44 .22 replica. It was very quick.
It's the same as a musket if you can fire a musket repeatedly with no lag between shots. So... in other words, its nothing like a musket.
-
My point being that its no different... one pull one bang ...its not a big scary automatic weapon...just cause it says semi auto. But lets mince words instead of the intent..typical getbig.
-
My point being that its no different... one pull one bang ...its not a big scary automatic weapon...just cause it says semi auto. But lets mince words instead of the intent..typical getbig.
But with all due respect, comparing a musket and a semi automatic is no where near comparing a semi and an auto. We are talking in the vein of mass shootings. You can do a LOT of damage with a AR-15 regardless of if it is in semi or auto. A musket ... to compare to a semi would be if you had to do 30 pushups after each shot from the semi auto.. then perhaps it's a fair comparison.
-
Look a competant minute man could fire 3 rounds in under a minute...walk into a mall with a brown bess...bayonete fixed and I guarantee you get all 3 shots off...maybe 6 or 10 before somebody does something....
Look dude I don't know but the point is...semi auto means nothing. As a gun owner you know this. And its not complicated to explian to the public what mag/clip semi auto etc means. My skorpion can hold a mag of 9 at .45...my .40 holds 12 and I can reload pretty damm fast. Hell you can by a drum of 5.56 holding 50 rounds....and the new drums are well made and expensive. None of it matters if the laws aren't upheld. I'm not sure how you detect a nutjob if he's not in the system.