Democrats Get The Ball Rolling

[kaz]

Time for what?

-Geaux

For Republicans to do some work for the people. They've been sitting on their hands for too long. Also, why is Trump talking with the NRA? Last I knew they don't influence policy. They are the last ones who should be influencing policy.

The NRA represents over 5 million gun owners is one reason. Laws will not reduce or change a thing. The law effects the lawful, not the unlawful

-Geaux

How would you know, you all have been railing against any gun laws. The banning of automatic weapons and attending to that watch list are two significant ways to start.

You just proved you do not know what your talking about you have to have a special licenses to own an automatic weapon. Its difficult to get and expensive.

Who cares about this? A semi automatic causes enough damage. Something is being done after the Democrats had their say so I'm happy about that.

You worry about whether a rifle will kill 200 or 100, both numbers are far too high.

That leftists say this crap while you fight to keep the right to walk across our southern border with all the guns you can carry is just comic. You people are so disingenuous

 

[PredFan]

I can't believe you are actually asking that question.

I can't believe you don't dare answer it.

I can easily answer it. Terrorists use planes for mass killings. You know that.

And they use guns for the same. You just created the equivalency. So much for your claims of a difference.

I never said they were different. You are just making shit up now. The way they do the watch list now is unconstitutional. It's wrong to use it to prevent flying, it's wrong to use it to prevent gun ownership. I am and have always been consistent on this.

If they allow due process before being placed on the list, then I have no problem with denying them both.

Is your fog lifting?

I'm not sure I see how it's "unconstitutional" to prevent them from flying, but I agree that there should be a process for them to challenge those decisions and have a hearing. You don't have a Constitutional right to drive either

You don't understand. It is unconstitutional the way it is now, because it denies you due process. The way it is set up now, they could put you in the no-fly list if you disagree with 0bama. There are no rules, no criteria.

 

[Brain357]

For Republicans to do some work for the people. They've been sitting on their hands for too long. Also, why is Trump talking with the NRA? Last I knew they don't influence policy. They are the last ones who should be influencing policy.

The NRA represents over 5 million gun owners is one reason. Laws will not reduce or change a thing. The law effects the lawful, not the unlawful

-Geaux

How would you know, you all have been railing against any gun laws. The banning of automatic weapons and attending to that watch list are two significant ways to start.

You just proved you do not know what your talking about you have to have a special licenses to own an automatic weapon. Its difficult to get and expensive.

Who cares about this? A semi automatic causes enough damage. Something is being done after the Democrats had their say so I'm happy about that.

You worry about whether a rifle will kill 200 or 100, both numbers are far too high.

Those numbers are imaginary and ridiculously provocative. It was 49. He had three hours. I could kill 49 people in three hours with any gun you can name.

3 hours due to hostage and standoff with police. He killed and wounded very quickly obviously. Don't be so dishonest.

 

[The Rabbi]

They aren't that different, that's just your argument. Semi automatics kill many in a short period of time and you don't need that for any reason.

Absolutely untrue. You don't know enough to be arguing.

We have all seen the results of a semi auto. 50 dead and 50 injured. We all know enough.

There would have been many times that number if the shooter had a full auto weapon.

youtube.com/watch?v=Uo4kFzECXGs

Wrong
THere would have been many fewer.
Full auto is inaccurate and wasteful of ammo. This is why the military never trains soldiers to use full auto, or even 3 round burst.

How accurate does one have to be when firing into a crowed confined space of hundreds of massed targets? And why would a mass killer knowing he would not survive in the end worry about wasting ammo?

So you agree that a full auto would have been no more lethal.
Thanks. Next absurd argument please.

 

[Brain357]

For Republicans to do some work for the people. They've been sitting on their hands for too long. Also, why is Trump talking with the NRA? Last I knew they don't influence policy. They are the last ones who should be influencing policy.

The NRA represents over 5 million gun owners is one reason. Laws will not reduce or change a thing. The law effects the lawful, not the unlawful

-Geaux

How would you know, you all have been railing against any gun laws. The banning of automatic weapons and attending to that watch list are two significant ways to start.

You just proved you do not know what your talking about you have to have a special licenses to own an automatic weapon. Its difficult to get and expensive.

And thanks to that seldom used in crimes.

Criminals do not follow the law that's why they are called criminals. Have you ever fired a full automatic weapon? In the military they are not used to mow down lines of people they are used for suppressive fire getting the enemy to duck. On full auto accuracy is garbage.

Your point is? Like I said, seldom used in crime. Gun control works.

 

[PredFan]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

 

[Brain357]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

And more die here than any other civilized country. That isn't a win.

 

[PredFan]

I can't believe you are actually asking that question.

I can't believe you don't dare answer it.

I can easily answer it. Terrorists use planes for mass killings. You know that.

Getting on a plane is also not a Constitutional right

Not technically, but it is covered by the equal protection clause.

So you think you have a Constitutional right to drive a car too?

Nonsense, the Constitution protects negative rights, not positive rights. Airports are government property often taken with eminent domain. If you apply positive rights as literally as you would have to do it to get there, they couldn't stop you from going through security without a ticket either

You can deny it all you want to. Doesn't change anything.

 

[kaz]

I can't believe you don't dare answer it.

I can easily answer it. Terrorists use planes for mass killings. You know that.

And they use guns for the same. You just created the equivalency. So much for your claims of a difference.

I never said they were different. You are just making shit up now. The way they do the watch list now is unconstitutional. It's wrong to use it to prevent flying, it's wrong to use it to prevent gun ownership. I am and have always been consistent on this.

If they allow due process before being placed on the list, then I have no problem with denying them both.

Is your fog lifting?

I'm not sure I see how it's "unconstitutional" to prevent them from flying, but I agree that there should be a process for them to challenge those decisions and have a hearing. You don't have a Constitutional right to drive either

You don't understand. It is unconstitutional the way it is now, because it denies you due process. The way it is set up now, they could put you in the no-fly list if you disagree with 0bama. There are no rules, no criteria.

So how can they stop you from going through security without a ticket? How can they deny a drivers license based on say a physical disability? You need to read up on positive and negative rights. They are entirely different things. You have no legitimate positive rights because every positive right by definition infringes on the rights of others

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

The NRA represents over 5 million gun owners is one reason. Laws will not reduce or change a thing. The law effects the lawful, not the unlawful

-Geaux

How would you know, you all have been railing against any gun laws. The banning of automatic weapons and attending to that watch list are two significant ways to start.

You just proved you do not know what your talking about you have to have a special licenses to own an automatic weapon. Its difficult to get and expensive.

And thanks to that seldom used in crimes.

Criminals do not follow the law that's why they are called criminals. Have you ever fired a full automatic weapon? In the military they are not used to mow down lines of people they are used for suppressive fire getting the enemy to duck. On full auto accuracy is garbage.

Your point is? Like I said, seldom used in crime. Gun control works.

No they are seldom used because they are hard to get and inaccurate on full auto its real life not Black OPS or a movie.

 

[whitehall]

What the hell has Barry Hussein done in the last 7 1/2 years of his sorry and inept administration besides "cash for clunkers" and forcing young girls to accept confused boys in their locker room? I mean, really the democrat party had control of the entire enchelada in Hussein's first two years and they did nothing. Now the left blames the GOP while we still have a liberal do-nothing democrat president in the White House. If democrats were serious about gun control and not using it as a political football they would call for the indictment of the federal officers who were responsible for "Operation Fast/Furious" which became an accessory to the murder of at least one U.S. citizen and perhaps hundreds of Mexicans.

 

[PredFan]

I can easily answer it. Terrorists use planes for mass killings. You know that.

And they use guns for the same. You just created the equivalency. So much for your claims of a difference.

I never said they were different. You are just making shit up now. The way they do the watch list now is unconstitutional. It's wrong to use it to prevent flying, it's wrong to use it to prevent gun ownership. I am and have always been consistent on this.

If they allow due process before being placed on the list, then I have no problem with denying them both.

Is your fog lifting?

I'm not sure I see how it's "unconstitutional" to prevent them from flying, but I agree that there should be a process for them to challenge those decisions and have a hearing. You don't have a Constitutional right to drive either

You don't understand. It is unconstitutional the way it is now, because it denies you due process. The way it is set up now, they could put you in the no-fly list if you disagree with 0bama. There are no rules, no criteria.

So how can they stop you from going through security without a ticket? How can they deny a drivers license based on say a physical disability? You need to read up on positive and negative rights. They are entirely different things. You have no legitimate positive rights because every positive right by definition infringes on the rights of others

Remember that I originally stated that it wasn't technically a right, but that it was covered by the constitution. Under the equal protection clause. Which applies in the case of the no-fly list.

 

[Camp]

Absolutely untrue. You don't know enough to be arguing.

We have all seen the results of a semi auto. 50 dead and 50 injured. We all know enough.

There would have been many times that number if the shooter had a full auto weapon.

youtube.com/watch?v=Uo4kFzECXGs

Wrong
THere would have been many fewer.
Full auto is inaccurate and wasteful of ammo. This is why the military never trains soldiers to use full auto, or even 3 round burst.

How accurate does one have to be when firing into a crowed confined space of hundreds of massed targets? And why would a mass killer knowing he would not survive in the end worry about wasting ammo?

So you agree that a full auto would have been no more lethal.
Thanks. Next absurd argument please.

I did not agree at all you dope. In the Orlando incident, the people were massed in a confined space making accuracy irrelevant. Full auto would have been accurate enough to spray far more projectiles in the mass of people, hence, causing more hits on the target, the target being the mass of people crowded together in the confined space.
I am waiting for your response regarding the Class 3 license you claim is not necessary for having a full auto weapon.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

Yes, you have always won on guns .. but times are a'changin' with the right having far less control of our government and laws .. with even less control on the way .. with no control of the Supreme Court .. dummy

.. and yes, guns are indeed a social issue.

 

[PredFan]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

Yes, you have always won on guns .. but times are a'changin' with the right having far less control of our government and laws .. with even less control on the way .. with no control of the Supreme Court .. dummy

.. and yes, guns are indeed a social issue.

Typical idiot lefty. You the no all you have to do is say something and it magically becomes fact.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

Yes, you have always won on guns .. but times are a'changin' with the right having far less control of our government and laws .. with even less control on the way .. with no control of the Supreme Court .. dummy

.. and yes, guns are indeed a social issue.

Typical idiot lefty. You the no all you have to do is say something and it magically becomes fact.

That's because you don't possess the intelligence to counter what has been said.

If you don't believe that .. try it and I'll show you. :0)

 

[PredFan]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

Yes, you have always won on guns .. but times are a'changin' with the right having far less control of our government and laws .. with even less control on the way .. with no control of the Supreme Court .. dummy

.. and yes, guns are indeed a social issue.

And we are now going to win on guns with the LGBTQ crowd too:

Gun sales surge among gays, lesbians after Orlando shooting

 

[PredFan]

If you can't elect a president .. and you can't .. then you can't affect the Supreme Court.

Without question gun laws WILL change in this country .. and there won't be a goddamn thing right-wingers can do about it .. just as you have been a total failure on just about every other social issue in this country.

Guns are not a social issue idiot. And we have always won on gun rights.

Yes, you have always won on guns .. but times are a'changin' with the right having far less control of our government and laws .. with even less control on the way .. with no control of the Supreme Court .. dummy

.. and yes, guns are indeed a social issue.

Typical idiot lefty. You the no all you have to do is say something and it magically becomes fact.

That's because you don't possess the intelligence to counter what has been said.

If you don't believe that .. try it and I'll show you. :0)

You are going to show me the future? You are dumber than you appear. You can't even prove that gun control is a social issue.

 

[The Rabbi]

We have all seen the results of a semi auto. 50 dead and 50 injured. We all know enough.

There would have been many times that number if the shooter had a full auto weapon.

youtube.com/watch?v=Uo4kFzECXGs

Wrong
THere would have been many fewer.
Full auto is inaccurate and wasteful of ammo. This is why the military never trains soldiers to use full auto, or even 3 round burst.

How accurate does one have to be when firing into a crowed confined space of hundreds of massed targets? And why would a mass killer knowing he would not survive in the end worry about wasting ammo?

So you agree that a full auto would have been no more lethal.
Thanks. Next absurd argument please.

I did not agree at all you dope. In the Orlando incident, the people were massed in a confined space making accuracy irrelevant. Full auto would have been accurate enough to spray far more projectiles in the mass of people, hence, causing more hits on the target, the target being the mass of people crowded together in the confined space.
I am waiting for your response regarding the Class 3 license you claim is not necessary for having a full auto weapon.

He had limited ammo. He probably used all of it. How does using a full auto result in more projectiles being sprayed?
There is no such thing as a "Class 3 license." I own a full auto and I do not have a "Class 3 License".

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Somehow I see the law of unintended consequences kicking in.