Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Bfgrn]

Jefferson tree of liberty is my favorite of Jefferson's quote, why don't you use it

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Assault weapons bans usually involve dates and are bans on sales. The weapon used is an obvious assault weapon and there was no AR-15 left in the vehicle. It was a military style shotgun and may have even been like this one, hence the confusion:

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

I question why you didn't prove it.

Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi; Armalite AR-180; Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol; Auto-Ordnance Thompson type; Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type; Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1; Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol; Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 Carbien type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 Series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; USI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol.

Source: ASSAULT WEAPON

This is what happens when the gungrabbers get to control the language on the issue.

There isn't a single of those weapons on that list that is a fully automatic weapon. Everyone of those is an Ugly and Scary looking, Semi-Automatic.

Hell, I saw a shotgun on Saturday that nearly made me wet my pants. Scary wasn't the word for how this damn thing looked.

It terrified me.

But it was still a Semi-Automatic. In all reality it was no different than other semi-automatic shot gun, it was cosmetically ugly, mechanically normal.

 

[martybegan]

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

Yes yo do, and you have all sorts of anger issues. Plus, having to accuse those who disagree with you of mental issues shows the very weakness of your own argument.

Want strict gun control? work to repeal the 2nd amendment. Other than that go pound sand.

Negged for being a namecaller.

 

[Dubya]

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

Yes yo do, and you have all sorts of anger issues. Plus, having to accuse those who disagree with you of mental issues shows the very weakness of your own argument.

Want strict gun control? work to repeal the 2nd amendment. Other than that go pound sand.

Negged for being a namecaller.

How's your guns doing up there in New York state, marty?

Bwhaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha

 

[The Rabbi]

Did Dorner pass a background check?

Yes.

Did Dorner use guns he bought legally after passing a background check to kill people?

Yes.

This proves that background checks do not stop people who are going to kill others from buying guns.

By the way, it is absolutely impossible for almost anyone to legally buy a gun in the UK, and every legally owned weapon in that country is registered with the government so they can easily confiscate the weapons. In other words, they have exactly the system you claim will fix everything.

Yet, despite having your perfect system in place, gun crimes increased.


Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online


That means that, once again, I do not have to prove something that you insist I have to prove in order to prove your ideas are dumber than letting a dog shit on your supper.


They simply do not work.

And I predict that is the last response Dumya will give to that thread, an objection he raised himself.
Yes, gun laws don't work. We have a 100 year history of them not working. And as in real life, Dumya's suggestions for improvement go ever more towards restriction and control. First background checks. When pointed out those wont work,, then gun registration. When that won't work, keeping them locked up. When that wont work, keeping them disassembled. When that won't work, confiscating them. When that won't work outlawing knives. When that wont work constant video surveillance inside everyone's home by the gov't. Hello, Big Brother.
He is a big gov dunce of epic proportions and a total fail so bad he's turned off his rep.

What was there like 35 to 50 homicides by gun that year in the UK and 11,000 here?

And how many in Mexico, which has stricter gun laws than the U.S?

As usual you deflect to irrelevance when caught in a web of lies and deceit.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Misusing? Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any more clear. He made similar statements.

"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482

"I willingly acquiesce in the institutions of my country, perfect or imperfect, and think it a duty to leave their modifications to those who are to live under them and are to participate of the good or evil they may produce. The present generation has the same right of self-government which the past one has exercised for itself." --Thomas Jefferson to John Hampden Pleasants, 1824. ME 16:29

"What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393

"To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258

"The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." --Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465

Jefferson tree of liberty is my favorite of Jefferson's quote, why don't you use it

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

Speaking for myself, my first thoughts was that I hoped there is special place in hell for people like him.

My second thoughts were for the families and friends of those killed, and their futures.

That was all that I was concerned about.

Then Feinstein and the other Gun Grabbers started opening their mouths and when I heard that Feinstein had spent over a year working on that bill she presented within days I had to wonder why she spent a year writing a bill that she knew wouldn't pass even in the Democratic Controlled Senate.

Then I saw that look on her face, my first reaction that she must have popped the cork on several bottles of Champagne and danced on her desktop when she heard of the shooting. She was going to get a chance to use that bill that she spent over a year working on.

For over 20 years she has wanted to make every gun illegal for the private citizen to own and here was her chance to get a good start on it again.

Another thought that I had was perhaps she was in on the Fast And Furious plans and had that bill ready to go for when they were able to break the story the way they wanted. Too bad for them.. That didn't happen so she had to sit on it even longer.

 

[martybegan]

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

Yes yo do, and you have all sorts of anger issues. Plus, having to accuse those who disagree with you of mental issues shows the very weakness of your own argument.

Want strict gun control? work to repeal the 2nd amendment. Other than that go pound sand.

Negged for being a namecaller.

How's your guns doing up there in New York state, marty?

Bwhaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha

Just waiting on the eventual lawsuits. It will be overturned.

Also started the process of getting whatever type of handgun is allowed to me. Hopefully they will deny me a semi auto, at which point I will get a revolver, and offer myself as a plantiff for any lawsuit the NRA or similar organization desires.

The most I have on my record is 1 speeding ticket from 10 years ago.

 

[Oddball]

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

It's the Bil of RIGHTS, not the Bill of Needs or the Bill of Feelings, cement head.

 

[Oddball]

Yet you don't seem to give a flying fuck about the same number of beautiful children being killed in places like DC, Chicago and LA every month.

Nope...Opportunist dickweeds like you are all about the big easily exploitable massacres, rather than the places where your fascistic gun control laws are towering failures.

This isn't just about massacres. America has a gun violence epidemic. Turd brains like you must believe we still live in the wagon train days. How hard is it to leave a municipality or state with strict gun laws to buy a gun in a state with lax ones? THAT is why we need federal legislation pea brain.

You have never uttered one word that would give anyone even the the impression that you care about anyone but yourself.

Is being a turd brain that believes we still live in wagon train days worse than being a person that ignores all the facts that prove them wrong?

We gotta whole lotta that going on in this thread.

The intellectual dishonesty, rank ignorance and plain old garden variety lying is so thick you can cut it with a chain saw.

 

[Dubya]

Yes yo do, and you have all sorts of anger issues. Plus, having to accuse those who disagree with you of mental issues shows the very weakness of your own argument.

Want strict gun control? work to repeal the 2nd amendment. Other than that go pound sand.

Negged for being a namecaller.

How's your guns doing up there in New York state, marty?

Bwhaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha

Just waiting on the eventual lawsuits. It will be overturned.

Also started the process of getting whatever type of handgun is allowed to me. Hopefully they will deny me a semi auto, at which point I will get a revolver, and offer myself as a plantiff for any lawsuit the NRA or similar organization desires.

The most I have on my record is 1 speeding ticket from 10 years ago.

Sure it will, just like all those other bans in states (sarc)!

 

[Bfgrn]

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

I question why you didn't prove it.

Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi; Armalite AR-180; Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol; Auto-Ordnance Thompson type; Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type; Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1; Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol; Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 Carbien type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 Series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; USI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol.

Source: ASSAULT WEAPON

This is what happens when the gungrabbers get to control the language on the issue.

There isn't a single of those weapons on that list that is a fully automatic weapon. Everyone of those is an Ugly and Scary looking, Semi-Automatic.

Hell, I saw a shotgun on Saturday that nearly made me wet my pants. Scary wasn't the word for how this damn thing looked.

It terrified me.

But it was still a Semi-Automatic. In all reality it was no different than other semi-automatic shot gun, it was cosmetically ugly, mechanically normal.

It has nothing to do with how they 'look'. It has to do with the vast amount of human carnage they inflict in a very, very short time span.

Here is how a Police Chief explains the true purpose of a semiautomatic AR-15 rifle before Congress:

"We use that weapon in police because of its technical capability, it's ability to cool down and handle round after round after round ... It's rugged...it's meant for a combat or environment that one would be placed in facing adversaries, human beings, people. That weapon can be retrofitted with other devices to enhance your offensive capability. The weapon itself has features to adjust it -- optics sights, for example -- that can cost hundreds of dollars, and I've shot this weapon many times -- that would enhance our capability in various tactical maneuvers, whether [you're firing] from the shoulder or the hip or whether you choose to spray fire that weapon or individually shoot from the shoulder. The optic sights are amazing, the technology advances that weapon has.

That weapon is the weapon of our time. It’s the place that we find ourselves in today. And, certainly, I believe it’s meant for the battlefield and in a public safety environment only."

 

[Dubya]

And I predict that is the last response Dumya will give to that thread, an objection he raised himself.
Yes, gun laws don't work. We have a 100 year history of them not working. And as in real life, Dumya's suggestions for improvement go ever more towards restriction and control. First background checks. When pointed out those wont work,, then gun registration. When that won't work, keeping them locked up. When that wont work, keeping them disassembled. When that won't work, confiscating them. When that won't work outlawing knives. When that wont work constant video surveillance inside everyone's home by the gov't. Hello, Big Brother.
He is a big gov dunce of epic proportions and a total fail so bad he's turned off his rep.

What was there like 35 to 50 homicides by gun that year in the UK and 11,000 here?

And how many in Mexico, which has stricter gun laws than the U.S?

As usual you deflect to irrelevance when caught in a web of lies and deceit.

That's why they come here to buy their guns, see?

 

[martybegan]

I question why you didn't prove it.



Source: ASSAULT WEAPON

This is what happens when the gungrabbers get to control the language on the issue.

There isn't a single of those weapons on that list that is a fully automatic weapon. Everyone of those is an Ugly and Scary looking, Semi-Automatic.

Hell, I saw a shotgun on Saturday that nearly made me wet my pants. Scary wasn't the word for how this damn thing looked.

It terrified me.

But it was still a Semi-Automatic. In all reality it was no different than other semi-automatic shot gun, it was cosmetically ugly, mechanically normal.

It has nothing to do with how they 'look'. It has to do with the vast amount of human carnage they inflict in a very, very short time span.

Here is how a Police Chief explains the true purpose of a semiautomatic AR-15 rifle before Congress:

"We use that weapon in police because of its technical capability, it's ability to cool down and handle round after round after round ... It's rugged...it's meant for a combat or environment that one would be placed in facing adversaries, human beings, people. That weapon can be retrofitted with other devices to enhance your offensive capability. The weapon itself has features to adjust it -- optics sights, for example -- that can cost hundreds of dollars, and I've shot this weapon many times -- that would enhance our capability in various tactical maneuvers, whether [you're firing] from the shoulder or the hip or whether you choose to spray fire that weapon or individually shoot from the shoulder. The optic sights are amazing, the technology advances that weapon has.

That weapon is the weapon of our time. It’s the place that we find ourselves in today. And, certainly, I believe it’s meant for the battlefield and in a public safety environment only."

So guns for him and his, and not for us. He can go to hell.

Any guns not allowed to the citizens of the US should not be allowed to its police forces. If we only want the military to have them, only the military should have them. Police are peace officers, and still civillans.

 

[Oddball]

What was there like 35 to 50 homicides by gun that year in the UK and 11,000 here?

And how many in Mexico, which has stricter gun laws than the U.S?

As usual you deflect to irrelevance when caught in a web of lies and deceit.

That's why they come here to buy their guns, see?

Right...Mexican crooks are just flooding into America to get all the dirt cheap and readily available guns, to then smuggle them back into Mexico!

Just when I thought the stupid on this tread couldn't get stupider!

 

[The Rabbi]

What was there like 35 to 50 homicides by gun that year in the UK and 11,000 here?

And how many in Mexico, which has stricter gun laws than the U.S?

As usual you deflect to irrelevance when caught in a web of lies and deceit.

That's why they come here to buy their guns, see?

You understand that's illegal, right?

As usual you deflect to irrelevance when caught in a web of lies and deceit.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I question why you didn't prove it.



Source: ASSAULT WEAPON

This is what happens when the gungrabbers get to control the language on the issue.

There isn't a single of those weapons on that list that is a fully automatic weapon. Everyone of those is an Ugly and Scary looking, Semi-Automatic.

Hell, I saw a shotgun on Saturday that nearly made me wet my pants. Scary wasn't the word for how this damn thing looked.

It terrified me.

But it was still a Semi-Automatic. In all reality it was no different than other semi-automatic shot gun, it was cosmetically ugly, mechanically normal.

It has nothing to do with how they 'look'. It has to do with the vast amount of human carnage they inflict in a very, very short time span.

Here is how a Police Chief explains the true purpose of a semiautomatic AR-15 rifle before Congress:

"We use that weapon in police because of its technical capability, it's ability to cool down and handle round after round after round ... It's rugged...it's meant for a combat or environment that one would be placed in facing adversaries, human beings, people. That weapon can be retrofitted with other devices to enhance your offensive capability. The weapon itself has features to adjust it -- optics sights, for example -- that can cost hundreds of dollars, and I've shot this weapon many times -- that would enhance our capability in various tactical maneuvers, whether [you're firing] from the shoulder or the hip or whether you choose to spray fire that weapon or individually shoot from the shoulder. The optic sights are amazing, the technology advances that weapon has.

That weapon is the weapon of our time. It’s the place that we find ourselves in today. And, certainly, I believe it’s meant for the battlefield and in a public safety environment only."

Strange according to Diane Feinstein, the leader of the Gun Grabbers in the Senate, it's all about appearances...

The following would be make a gun illegal. Not a single one makes the gun more deadly.

A pistol grip.
A forward grip.
A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
A barrel shroud.
A threaded barrel.
A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed 8 magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10
9 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
A threaded barrel.
A second pistol grip.
A barrel shroud.



I could go on, but that there should be enough to show that it is about appearances and not about ability to shoot more than one bullet on a single pull of the trigger.

 

[OKTexas]

The AR 15 used up there WAS NOT an assault weapon, it was a semi automatic weapon.

DUMB ASSES

All AR-15 are semi automatic weapons. The fact is Bushmaster made variants of the AR-15 which was banned in Connecticut. The Colt AR-15 is banned and it looked like the M-16, when I bought one, not long after I turned in my M-16. The Bushmaster even looks more like an assault weapon, but Connecticut fucked up and listed weapons instead of describing what an assault weapon was. Because of that mistake, the Connecticut assault weapons ban is considered a partial ban.

Now the gun nuts have played their games and it's the states chance to get even. Blame yourselves! Keep it up and Congress will be next!

That is a lie, CT described in their law exactly what was considered an assault weapon. The rifle used did not qualify under CT law as one. Rememeber what I told ya about these pesky little facts, they are what they are.

 

[OKTexas]

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Liberals don't have a 'gun grabbing agenda', no matter how much you butt hurt adolescent minded pea brains scream the sky is falling. The assault type weapons themselves have created an agenda to get them out of our communities. NOTHING the President proposes is a 'gun grabbing agenda'. It is common sense legislation.

NO ONE outside of a war zone needs a weapon that can fire off 100 rounds at a fire rate of a round per second. And if you FEEL you need that kind of firepower you belong in a padded cell. You have a deep mental illness of phobia and paranoia. You are unfit to own a pea shooter. Plus you might load your own pea brain in the straw and blow.

No dummie, having that kind of firepower, normally prevents the need for it. When you need the firepower and don't have it is when your screwed.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The gun show loophole exists, because violent feolons are people too, and they have human rights!

 

[Spoonman]

A spin off of the other thread where I have asked numerous times and not a single right winger has answered, is if you support the gun show loophole.

For those that may not know, under current federal law if you wish to purchases a firearm, you have to be run in a background check to make sure you are not a felon, been convicted of a violent crime, been in a mental institution, etc,..before they give the go ahead to sell that person a weapon. However under the "gun show loophole", there are not background checks at all.

That's right, absoutly nothing. A violent thug fresh out of the penitentiary, a terrorist, or a nutcases ready to commit the next sandy hook could go down to their local gun show, or find a classified ad selling a firearm and they could purchase deadly weapons, with no questions asked.

what gun show loophole?