Despicable....

[NYcarbineer]

How about letting the good people of the great state of NY decide for themselves what gun laws they want, provided they pass muster with the SCOTUS,

eh? Mr. states rights guy???

How about you allow Alabama to decide it's own abortion laws and marriage laws?

Oh wait, you are a hypocrite and will spout on and on about parts of the constitution that don't exist.

Meanwhile I have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and that right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

States rights stop at the rights of the people as enshrined in the Amendments.

You are glad then that the killer in Texas was able to legally obtain guns. Jesus Christ that is some sad shit there.

He was supposed to be on the banned list, and the government failed. Why should I suffer a loss of my rights because of it?

You don't want there to BE a banned list.

a banned list isn't going to stop someone from getting a gun, so it has no value.

And a law against rape won't stop women from getting raped, so it has no value?

 

[jc456]

How about you allow Alabama to decide it's own abortion laws and marriage laws?

Oh wait, you are a hypocrite and will spout on and on about parts of the constitution that don't exist.

Meanwhile I have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and that right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

States rights stop at the rights of the people as enshrined in the Amendments.

You are glad then that the killer in Texas was able to legally obtain guns. Jesus Christ that is some sad shit there.

He was supposed to be on the banned list, and the government failed. Why should I suffer a loss of my rights because of it?

You don't want there to BE a banned list.

a banned list isn't going to stop someone from getting a gun, so it has no value.

And a law against rape won't stop women from getting raped, so it has no value?

correct. a law does not prevent. Let me know when you find such a law?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You are glad then that the killer in Texas was able to legally obtain guns. Jesus Christ that is some sad shit there.

He was supposed to be on the banned list, and the government failed. Why should I suffer a loss of my rights because of it?

You don't want there to BE a banned list.

a banned list isn't going to stop someone from getting a gun, so it has no value.

And a law against rape won't stop women from getting raped, so it has no value?

correct. a law does not prevent.

Twenty minutes ago you said it did.

Let me ask you. Would you sell a gun to a felon if it's a felony to do so?

 

[jc456]

He was supposed to be on the banned list, and the government failed. Why should I suffer a loss of my rights because of it?

You don't want there to BE a banned list.

a banned list isn't going to stop someone from getting a gun, so it has no value.

And a law against rape won't stop women from getting raped, so it has no value?

correct. a law does not prevent.

Twenty minutes ago you said it did.

Let me ask you. Would you sell a gun to a felon if it's a felony to do so?

Twenty minutes ago you said it did.
never in my life would I make such a statement

Would you sell a gun to a felon if it's a felony to do so?
Absolutely not. don't be stupid.

Now if your question was do I think a felon can get a gun? then yes he'd be able to. And you couldn't stop him.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's amazing how important it is to have a 'moral compass', ethics, morality, respect for the law and others, and holding people at every level accountable for their own actions. Too bad Democrats / Liberals no longer believe in that and do not teach / pass that on anymore.

The above from someone who is happy the killer in Texas could legally buy guns. Jesus.

OOOOHHH, wrong. The AF failed to enter his convictions of beating his wife and child, had they entered them into the data base he would have been forced to buy them illegally.

Not in Texas he wouldn't. He could make a private sale purchase with no background check.

 

[JoeB131]

Meanwhile I have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and that right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

As part of a well-regulated Militia, but you keep forgetting that part.

 

[flacaltenn]

as a gun owner i do believe it is time to examine why these mass shootings are occurring....and perhaps more vetting

More VETTING? This guy was able to LEGALLY purchase weapons because the GOVT SCREWED UP the existing vetting. It's like giving apes jackhammers. Your FAITH in the FEDS to manage and ENFORCE the EXISTING gun regs is WAY too optimistic and not based on the facts.

I hope this lefty A-Hole walked out of the vigil to GO FIX the EXISTING problems with the primary tool that it used to screen purchases. But I KNOW -- that wasn't his intention..

 

[martybegan]

Meanwhile I have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and that right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

As part of a well-regulated Militia, but you keep forgetting that part.

Nope. The States have the right to call militias, the people keep the right to bear arms. There is no requirement between one or the other in the amendment.

 

[JoeB131]

More VETTING? This guy was able to LEGALLY purchase weapons because the GOVT SCREWED UP the existing vetting. It's like giving apes jackhammers. Your FAITH in the FEDS to manage and ENFORCE the EXISTING gun regs is WAY too optimistic and not based on the facts.

I think it's exactly the oppossite.

The whole NCIC system is based on someone putting something into a computer. No other background checks are done like if you were let's say, applying for a job, where they will call your former employer, your former co-workers, etc.

The thing is, within ONE DAY of this shooting, we were able to find out he got a bad conduct discharge from the Air Force, that he has had a spotty employment history, that he was in the middle of a dispute with his spouse....

Now imagine if we did those kinds of investigations before he bought a gun!

 

[JoeB131]

Nope. The States have the right to call militias, the people keep the right to bear arms. There is no requirement between one or the other in the amendment.

In your opinion. Look up US v. Miller, the courts have found otherwise.

 

[Doc1]

It's amazing how important it is to have a 'moral compass', ethics, morality, respect for the law and others, and holding people at every level accountable for their own actions. Too bad Democrats / Liberals no longer believe in that and do not teach / pass that on anymore.

The above from someone who is happy the killer in Texas could legally buy guns. Jesus.

OOOOHHH, wrong. The AF failed to enter his convictions of beating his wife and child, had they entered them into the data base he would have been forced to buy them illegally.

Not in Texas he wouldn't. He could make a private sale purchase with no background check.

Take it up with virtually the entire media, they're the ones reporting it.

 

[martybegan]

Nope. The States have the right to call militias, the people keep the right to bear arms. There is no requirement between one or the other in the amendment.

In your opinion. Look up US v. Miller, the courts have found otherwise.

The courts can kiss my ass.

 

[JoeB131]

The courts can kiss my ass

I'm sure they are looking forward to that, but if the courts rule tomorrow that the Second is really about militias and we FINALLY get some sane gun laws in this country, what are you going to do about it?

 

[jc456]

Meanwhile I have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and that right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

As part of a well-regulated Militia, but you keep forgetting that part.

and that can be defined anyway we want it to be.

 

[jc456]

The courts can kiss my ass

I'm sure they are looking forward to that, but if the courts rule tomorrow that the Second is really about militias and we FINALLY get some sane gun laws in this country, what are you going to do about it?

he won't ever have to so your question is stupid.

 

[flacaltenn]

More VETTING? This guy was able to LEGALLY purchase weapons because the GOVT SCREWED UP the existing vetting. It's like giving apes jackhammers. Your FAITH in the FEDS to manage and ENFORCE the EXISTING gun regs is WAY too optimistic and not based on the facts.

I think it's exactly the oppossite.

The whole NCIC system is based on someone putting something into a computer. No other background checks are done like if you were let's say, applying for a job, where they will call your former employer, your former co-workers, etc.

The thing is, within ONE DAY of this shooting, we were able to find out he got a bad conduct discharge from the Air Force, that he has had a spotty employment history, that he was in the middle of a dispute with his spouse....

Now imagine if we did those kinds of investigations before he bought a gun!

You're REALLY confused about this. It was STANDARD PRACTICE to have Military Court Orders and well as Civil ones in the system. The fucking INVESTIGATION WAS DONE and SHOULD have been in that system. To PREVENT the purchases and the killings.

 

[easyt65]

So Democrats call for assassinations and engage in wild violent rhetoric against the GOP...only to have one of their triggered masses attempt to carry out those assassinations...

Democrats don't even wait 12 hours to push gun legislation after the Vegas attack...

They run an ad in Virginia showing a Conservative in a vehicle running down fleeing minority kids ... right before a terrorist perpetrates the exact same act...

And now when another one of their 'flock' kills 26 and wounds 20+ more, Democrats rush to push gun legislation again, disrespectfully get up and walk out on a moment of silence for the victims and their families, and rails against the GOP for praying (a move that would have made the atheist Liberal murderer happy)...

...and the snowflakes rush to the defense of their despicable 'leaders'.




Who needs Russian money for Liberals / snowflakes to sew / incite division and violence in the US when we've got Democrats / Liberal Extremists willing to do it for free?!


(Perhaps this is a good to remind Democrats, though I should just allow them to self-destruct, that continued behavior like this is part of the reason you have lost 1,000+ elections, lost the House, lost the Senate, lost the WH, and are being exposed by your own party leaders / members as being corrupt / criminal.)

 

[martybegan]

The courts can kiss my ass

I'm sure they are looking forward to that, but if the courts rule tomorrow that the Second is really about militias and we FINALLY get some sane gun laws in this country, what are you going to do about it?

Depends on how far my local government types go.

 

[sartre play]

Problem is the difference between gun people & gun want a be, in a scary situation put me with the hunters, they no how there gun works, they no there ammo, because they hunt with other hunters, there eye always knows where people are before they shoot. they don't shot unless they no there target & its a safe shot .
Never put me in a scary situation with people who bought a gun for protection & have not been through extensive training. last on my list of never, guys who buy assault riffles to show how cool they are. a person with out experience with a gun is a danger to us all.

 

[JoeB131]

You're REALLY confused about this. It was STANDARD PRACTICE to have Military Court Orders and well as Civil ones in the system. The fucking INVESTIGATION WAS DONE and SHOULD have been in that system. To PREVENT the purchases and the killings.

I rather think that it is foolish to have the only protection between a community and a gun weilding madman to be someone remembering to file something.

The minute he applied to own a semi-automatic, they should have initiated a REAL investigation, not just relied on what was in a computer.