Leader Of Dem Sit-in Was On No-Fly List Himself

[JakeStarkey]

Liminal, your logic remains incoherent.

So far today Jake, you've managed to drag this discussion into the liberal sewer by insulting anyone with which you disagree.
Now, what else would you like to discuss?

Just using far right tactics, bud. Now give up the false dilemma fallacy and offer some solutions to the OP.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Thanks 99% of thread participants for further confirming my view that Americans have turned into partisan idiots.

MudWhistle and others, if you are so concerned about a background check that in no way records or identifies which weapons you use, I must question what it is you are afraid will be found.

For God sakes, I perform background checks on potential employees. We fingerprint teachers , we practically strip search you before you can board a plane.

Sorry to say, the days when you could trust your neighbor are LONG gone, and they aint coming back.

You want a gun, get a background check done.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

 

[jc456]

There will be another massacre by some kind of crazy for some other reason, and once again, we will find that there were all kinds of warning signs, but the NRA and the fruitloops here are more worried about the profits of the merchants of death than the safety of citizens.

There is no rational reason for citizens to own the modern weapons of war. Guns that were designed specifically for killing other humans and no other purpose. There have been many suggestions as to how to allow these weapons for citizens but keep them out of the hands of the crazies. And the gun nuts and NRA have scuttled everyone of them. At some point, the general population will tire of the slaughter and outlaw the ownership of the assault weapons. And you fools will have only yourselves to blame.

You should read the 2nd Amendment. It states equal ownership. Do you know what equal means? I swear, the inability for you to think is simply amazing. BTW, ever seen a no fly list? It contains names which other people have so innocent people are affected. you should really do some homework before posting.

 

[jc456]

Thanks 99% of thread participants for further confirming my view that Americans have turned into partisan idiots.

MudWhistle and others, if you are so concerned about a background check that in no way records or identifies which weapons you use, I must question what it is you are afraid will be found.

For God sakes, I perform background checks on potential employees. We fingerprint teachers , we practically strip search you before you can board a plane.

Sorry to say, the days when you could trust your neighbor are LONG gone, and they aint coming back.

You want a gun, get a background check done.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

Funny, that is most of the argument. I don't think anyone is opposed to background checks at all. This is what amazes me. no one opposes it including the NRA.

 

[rightwinger]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmund Pettus bridge in Selma

 

[WillowTree]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmunds bridge in Selma

Does Lewis have armed protection? Why does he want to deny us armed protection? Does he think his shit don't stink?

 

[Old Rocks]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Thanks 99% of thread participants for further confirming my view that Americans have turned into partisan idiots.

MudWhistle and others, if you are so concerned about a background check that in no way records or identifies which weapons you use, I must question what it is you are afraid will be found.

For God sakes, I perform background checks on potential employees. We fingerprint teachers , we practically strip search you before you can board a plane.

Sorry to say, the days when you could trust your neighbor are LONG gone, and they aint coming back.

You want a gun, get a background check done.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

Funny, that is most of the argument. I don't think anyone is opposed to background checks at all. This is what amazes me. no one opposes it including the NRA.

Of course there are people who oppose universal background checks.

And my plan is a little different that instead of having to get a background check done each time you want to buy a gun. you have one throughough check by the FBI, its good for 5 years. In that time all you do is present your id which says "background check complete" and a dealer can simply run your ID number to make sure no flags have been placed . As for private sellers, that's not necessary, or feasible to enforce.

If you get caught with a weapon with no background check , including so much as a ,38 revolver, you get 10 years in prison for each weapon.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

There are in fact many idiots who want to register and or ban guns. That is ridiculous.

Tell you what, go police your own, convince them that they are wrong to want to register guns and or ban guns, hell some even want to CONFISCATE guns.

Get that done then come back and talk to us about the issue.

 

[WillowTree]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

This morning Charlie wrangle said no private citizen needs to be armed. Now what say you?

 

[rightwinger]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmunds bridge in Selma

Does Lewis have armed protection? Why does he want to deny us armed protection? Does he think his shit don't stink?

Where has Lewis ever said you can't have armed protection?

I doubt if Lewis has an AR-15

 

[Fair&Balanced]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmunds bridge in Selma

Does Lewis have armed protection? Why does he want to deny us armed protection? Does he think his shit don't stink?

Where has Lewis ever said you can't have armed protection?

I doubt if Lewis has an AR-15

Oh, the dreaded AR15, the "weapon of war" LOL you people are ridiculous.

 

[thereisnospoon]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

Narrowing my focus on personal defense....Perhaps you should take note of close confrontation and pick up a pistol

 

[Fair&Balanced]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

Please stop referring to AR15s, etc etc as "war weapons" it's dishonest political jargon and does nothing to further the solution to our very obvious problem.

I have FOUR fully automatic assault rifles. NONE of which have ever murdered anyone. PROVING conclusively that weapons are not the problem. The person pulling the trigger is.

 

[WillowTree]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

Please stop referring to AR15s, etc etc as "war weapons" it's dishonest political jargon and does nothing to further the solution to our very obvious problem.

I have FOUR fully automatic assault rifles. NONE of which have ever murdered anyone. PROVING conclusively that weapons are not the problem. The person pulling the trigger is.

I think the craze Islamic terrorist in Orlando killed more people with a clock. It's ideology that is the cancer among us.

 

[mudwhistle]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Then Democrats are terrorist sympathizers, because they refused to work with Republicans and pass a bill.

You see nothing with selling Omar Mateen an assault weapon...

You are just really a sick fucker...

Nope. Obama was stated by Mateen to be the motivation for the attack, and lax anti-terrorist policies made it possible for a guy on the terrorist watch list to buy a gun without lifting a finger, simply because of political -correctness. He had a troubled past and never should have been allowed to buy a gun. He was reported on several occasions to be violent, but his record was scrubbed.

 

[rightwinger]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmunds bridge in Selma

Does Lewis have armed protection? Why does he want to deny us armed protection? Does he think his shit don't stink?

Where has Lewis ever said you can't have armed protection?

I doubt if Lewis has an AR-15

Oh, the dreaded AR15, the "weapon of war" LOL you people are ridiculous.

Can't beat it for shooting first graders

 

[Fair&Balanced]

In the rush to take our guns, the hypocrisy by Democrats is glaring. Democrats think that love will protect us from a terrorist attack. Obama just released another terrorist from GITMO, most of which have gone back to terrorism, yet he and the Dems want to use an attack, the cause of which can be directly linked to the White House, as a reason to take away our rights. All of this screaming and yelling over a bill that will not save one single life.



Rep Lewis Was Once On The No-Fly List He Wants To Use To Restrict Gun Rights

Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list he now wants to use to restrict gun ownership for U.S. citizens.

Lewis staged a “sit-in” at the House of Representatives Wednesday to call for a law barring people on the federal no-fly list from purchasing guns. But Lewis himself was erroneously put on the list at one point for an entire year, meaning he would have been unable to buy a gun had his new proposal been law.

Several different gun control measures have been circulating in Congress in the wake of Omar Mateen’s June 12 shooting spree at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One of the proposals would ban anybody on the federal government’s no-fly list from purchasing a gun. In the House, Lewis has become a champion of such a rule, leading an occupation of the House floor to demand a vote on the measure.




Lewis may view the no-fly list as a good vehicle for stopping terrorists from getting weapons. But terrorists wouldn’t be the only people hindered by Collins’ proposal. In fact, if such a law had existed a decade ago, Lewis himself would have been victimized by it.

Press accounts from 2004 to 2008 reveal that Lewis’ name somehow ended up on the federal no-fly list, and remained there for years despite his best efforts to get it off. In 2004, he claimed he was stopped 35 to 40 times in a single year by airport personnel who tried to keep him from flying. Presumably, if the “no fly, no gun” law had been in place then, Lewis would have had even more trouble buying a gun than he had getting on a plane.

Lewis isn’t the only prominent person to have trouble with the no-fly list, as Sen. Ted Kennedy and singer Cat Stevens also claimed they were mistakenly placed on it. Their experiences illustrate one of the chief criticisms of the no-fly list: That it can limit individual rights while giving individuals very limited power to fight back.

According to the FBI, the current no-fly list has about 81,000 names, although only a few hundred of them are Americans.​

Beyond that, Conservatives accused Lewis of being a communist, a race baiter and agitator

That was before they crushed his skull on the Edmunds bridge in Selma

Does Lewis have armed protection? Why does he want to deny us armed protection? Does he think his shit don't stink?

Where has Lewis ever said you can't have armed protection?

I doubt if Lewis has an AR-15

Oh, the dreaded AR15, the "weapon of war" LOL you people are ridiculous.

Can't beat it for shooting first graders

Your plea to emotion doesn't work.

if I were a deranged nut set on killing first graders, which would prevent me from killing more first graders.

A) Armed guards performing searches of anyone trying to enter school grounds

B) Banning semi automatic black rifles

 

[jc456]

Thanks 99% of thread participants for further confirming my view that Americans have turned into partisan idiots.

MudWhistle and others, if you are so concerned about a background check that in no way records or identifies which weapons you use, I must question what it is you are afraid will be found.

For God sakes, I perform background checks on potential employees. We fingerprint teachers , we practically strip search you before you can board a plane.

Sorry to say, the days when you could trust your neighbor are LONG gone, and they aint coming back.

You want a gun, get a background check done.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

If I get my background check done, it's NONE of anyone's business what firearms I own.

Funny, that is most of the argument. I don't think anyone is opposed to background checks at all. This is what amazes me. no one opposes it including the NRA.

Of course there are people who oppose universal background checks.

And my plan is a little different that instead of having to get a background check done each time you want to buy a gun. you have one throughough check by the FBI, its good for 5 years. In that time all you do is present your id which says "background check complete" and a dealer can simply run your ID number to make sure no flags have been placed . As for private sellers, that's not necessary, or feasible to enforce.

If you get caught with a weapon with no background check , including so much as a ,38 revolver, you get 10 years in prison for each weapon.

who opposes universal background checks, post up some link.

 

[rightwinger]

"Democratic Rep. John Lewis was erroneously put on the no-fly list"

And?

The no fly list is not an issue by which to remove gun rights of all Americans.

Anyone who opposes blocking gun sales to those on the no fly list are terrorist sympathizers.

Bullshit. I oppose using the no fly list which is A) rife with mistakes and B) composed completely in secret as a tool to prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights, that doesn't mean I don't favor other , more transparent methods of doing so.

The solution is simple, Full FBI background checks for anyone who wants the ability to buy a gun. If you get caught owning a gun without having undergone said background check , 10 years in prison. NO exceptions.

If you don't want to undergo the FBI background check, tough shit.

That's essentially gun confiscation.

Some people have guns that have been in the family for decades if not over a hundred years. Are you gonna throw then in prison for that?

I think we as level headed intelligent adults can come to an understanding that although the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct, we can also come to an understanding that that right is not absolute.
For example, I see nothing wrong with a person going through a similar licensing procedure ( written test and training courses) as one does when they wish to operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I also see no reason to not undergo at least a State background check. Heck we are subject to these when we accept employment offers.
What I see here are two fringe factions engaging in this fight. One is for absolute gun rights. The other is in support of eliminating the right to keep and bear arms.
Meanwhile the rest of us are growing weary of this bickering.

Exactly. Here is the problem, the instant you suggest that we need to prevent certain kinds of people from getting weapons that have the capacity to kill many people very rapidly, the gun nuts immediatly start the bullshit that we are trying to ban all guns. And keep up that meme, no matter how many times you point out that we are speaking of a certain class of weapons in the hands of a certain kind of person.

I have owned guns for 60 years. Hunting rifles and a shotgun. Perfectly adaquete for self defense, and in fact, have used the shotgun in exactly that capacity. I will never have one of the war weapons in my house, and really believe that no one needs one of those. However, I do not propose that we try to take those weapons away from anyone presently owning them. But require them to have the same license as that required for a full automatic weapon when they have said weapon off their own property. If they are found to have such a weapon off their own property without that license, they have committed a felony, and lose their right to own any firearm, all their firearms are confiscated and destroyed. To buy such a weapon, you would have to get that license ahead of time. Whether the sale was a dealer or private. And anyone selling anyone else such a weapon without such licenses on both ends would be subject to the same law.

Now it is not going to take but one or two more massacres with this type of weapon and you will see far more stringent laws than this put into place, and it will be the fault of you gun nuts who blocked all reasonable laws.

Please stop referring to AR15s, etc etc as "war weapons" it's dishonest political jargon and does nothing to further the solution to our very obvious problem.

I have FOUR fully automatic assault rifles. NONE of which have ever murdered anyone. PROVING conclusively that weapons are not the problem. The person pulling the trigger is.

PROVING conclusively that weapons are not the problem. The person pulling the trigger is

Came up with that one on your own did ya?

Cars are not a problem, it is the people driving them
Guns don't kill people, it is people with guns that kill people

Just because there is a human element doesn't mean you don't place restrictions on both the human and the object