Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I take no issue with the requirement that I produce a photo ID for voting ot buying a gun -- it is the least restrictive means available to confirm that you are who you say you are when you exercise the relevant right.There's no such thing as prior restraint as applied to requiring proof of eligibility to purchase a commodity. That is made-up nonsense.
If requiring a person who wants to vote to prove that they are eligible to vote in that district is wrong, then requiring a background check is also.
I have my Concealed Permit. I still have to have a background check, which is $10, every time I buy a weapon. I just don't have to wait the three business days to pick it up.
Now that is still a point of interest, isn't it? The same faction demanding photo ID checks prior to a citizen exercising one Right (this one specifically identified in the Constitution) screams longest, loudest, and hardest if the barest suggestion of requiring photo ID to exercise another "right". I guess "rights" are protected only if the squeaky wheel faction feels they should be protected.
Is it illegal for these people to buy/own/possess/use a firearm?Given the information I've seen that the majority of these nutcases shooting people up at random are on some form, or have been on some form, of psychotropic drugs intended to control mood or personality disorders, I would suggest that anyone diagnosed and prescribed a regimen of drugs for this range of disorders should be entered into some kind of database. This database should be included in the NCIS program. If their names show up on the database, they should not be permitted to legally acquire firearms, just like the criminals listed in the database.The background check is one of the appropriate enforcement mechanisms against illegal gun ownership.
Your positiion is comparable to saying that even if the drinking age is 21, stores should have no right to check I.D. before someone buys alcohol.
I take no issue with the requirement that I produce a photo ID for voting ot buying a gun -- it is the least restrictive means available to confirm that you are who you say you are when you exercise the relevant right.If requiring a person who wants to vote to prove that they are eligible to vote in that district is wrong, then requiring a background check is also.
I have my Concealed Permit. I still have to have a background check, which is $10, every time I buy a weapon. I just don't have to wait the three business days to pick it up.
Now that is still a point of interest, isn't it? The same faction demanding photo ID checks prior to a citizen exercising one Right (this one specifically identified in the Constitution) screams longest, loudest, and hardest if the barest suggestion of requiring photo ID to exercise another "right". I guess "rights" are protected only if the squeaky wheel faction feels they should be protected.
Then there is no legal bsis to deny these people the purchase of a gun.Not currently...Is it illegal for these people to buy/own/possess/use a firearm?Given the information I've seen that the majority of these nutcases shooting people up at random are on some form, or have been on some form, of psychotropic drugs intended to control mood or personality disorders, I would suggest that anyone diagnosed and prescribed a regimen of drugs for this range of disorders should be entered into some kind of database. This database should be included in the NCIS program. If their names show up on the database, they should not be permitted to legally acquire firearms, just like the criminals listed in the database.
All of this is unquestionably true.They also refuse to attribute personal responsibility to those who commit these acts. All they see are "evil", "bad" guns and the guns must be punished. Anyone who "protects" these evil guns are condemned as evil, as well.
I don't.Same here. I also have to present photo ID to buy cigarettes or alcohol, if that were my desire. Not a problem.I take no issue with the requirement that I produce a photo ID for voting ot buying a gun -- it is the least restrictive means available to confirm that you are who you say you are when you exercise the relevant right.Now that is still a point of interest, isn't it? The same faction demanding photo ID checks prior to a citizen exercising one Right (this one specifically identified in the Constitution) screams longest, loudest, and hardest if the barest suggestion of requiring photo ID to exercise another "right". I guess "rights" are protected only if the squeaky wheel faction feels they should be protected.
Exactly.Because they're a bunch of pussies. They don't really care about stopping those deaths. They will politicize them. But they won't risk their jobs over it.If that's true, why then are they trying to pass restrictions that would not have prevented the Newtown shooting and will not prevent another like it?
These people believe the state should have a monopoly on force; an armed citizenry gets in the way of this.
Then there is no legal bsis to deny these people the purchase of a gun.Not currently...Is it illegal for these people to buy/own/possess/use a firearm?
Until there is, what you suggest cannot happen; I see a lot of people that want a database like this, but none that understands that for this database to have any effect the law needs to be changed to make it illegal for these people to buy guns, much less advocating such a thing.
All of this is unquestionably true.They also refuse to attribute personal responsibility to those who commit these acts. All they see are "evil", "bad" guns and the guns must be punished. Anyone who "protects" these evil guns are condemned as evil, as well.
I don't.Same here. I also have to present photo ID to buy cigarettes or alcohol, if that were my desire. Not a problem.I take no issue with the requirement that I produce a photo ID for voting ot buying a gun -- it is the least restrictive means available to confirm that you are who you say you are when you exercise the relevant right.
I -was- carded for a rated-M video game not too long ago, however.
Same here, grey-bearded and all.What I do get a laugh out of (sadly) is when, in order to be completely PC, someone as obviously long-in-tooth and sporting the long gray locks of a "seasoned citizen" should be carded for purchases requiring a minimum age. There is just no way I could be mistaken for 19, or even 21.I don't.Same here. I also have to present photo ID to buy cigarettes or alcohol, if that were my desire. Not a problem.
I -was- carded for a rated-M video game not too long ago, however.
I would back if it:
-The backgound checks poposed would have prevented the Newtown shooting and will prevent another like it
- Background checks were not a form a prior restraint, which is an infringement of the right.
There's no such thing as prior restraint as applied to requiring proof of eligibility to purchase a commodity. That is made-up nonsense.
If requiring a person who wants to vote to prove that they are eligible to vote in that district is wrong, then requiring a background check is also.
I have my Concealed Permit. I still have to have a background check, which is $10, every time I buy a weapon. I just don't have to wait the three business days to pick it up.
There's no such thing as prior restraint as applied to requiring proof of eligibility to purchase a commodity. That is made-up nonsense.
If requiring a person who wants to vote to prove that they are eligible to vote in that district is wrong, then requiring a background check is also.
I have my Concealed Permit. I still have to have a background check, which is $10, every time I buy a weapon. I just don't have to wait the three business days to pick it up.
Now that is still a point of interest, isn't it? The same faction demanding photo ID checks prior to a citizen exercising one Right (this one specifically identified in the Constitution) screams longest, loudest, and hardest if the barest suggestion of requiring photo ID to exercise another "right". I guess "rights" are protected only if the squeaky wheel faction feels they should be protected.
Can you check a person's ID before you sell them a six-pack?
Can you check a person's ID before you sell them a six-pack?
A person engaged in selling alcohol has to check ID just like the person engaged in selling guns has to check ID by existing law.
Obama uses grieving parents to promote gun legislation
Obama uses grieving parents to promote gun legislation
Who better to help reduce gun violence than victims of gun violence?
Anyone remember America's Most Wanted with John Walsh? His son was a victim (abducted and murdered).
I am way late in this thread...but...yes, this was as pathetic as it was obvious.
These people lost children, and to take that crushing grief and use it to score political points in egregious.
But, it isn't like this is something we have never seen before. Politicians are politicians...and Obama is not any different than any other one you could draw from a hat.
The Newtown families came to Washington because they expected Congress to finally do something.........suckers
I am way late in this thread...but...yes, this was as pathetic as it was obvious.
These people lost children, and to take that crushing grief and use it to score political points in egregious.
But, it isn't like this is something we have never seen before. Politicians are politicians...and Obama is not any different than any other one you could draw from a hat.
The Newtown families came to Washington because they expected Congress to finally do something.........suckers
If Goldman Sachs wanted it - we would get it the next day.
The Newtown families came to Washington because they expected Congress to finally do something.........suckers
If Goldman Sachs wanted it - we would get it the next day.
And if the NRA, the mouthpiece for gun manufacturer profits doesn't want it, we don't get it. Even when over 90% of We, the People want it.
The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809).
If Goldman Sachs wanted it - we would get it the next day.
And if the NRA, the mouthpiece for gun manufacturer profits doesn't want it, we don't get it. Even when over 90% of We, the People want it.
The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809).
I will say for the 1000th time - we are living in oligarchical governance - we are no longer a representative republic, and haven't been since the 1980's.
This is also why corporations are getting larger and larger and larger, they get HUGE tax abatements, HUGE tax loopholes, laws made that favor them and make it nearly impossible for small businesses to overcome etc. etc. etc.
Some of these parents are undoubtedly in a state of depression, and Obama uses them to promote his new gun legislation . Obama is scum
Mother Of Slain Newtown Boy Gives White House Weekly Address
WHITE HOUSE President Barack Obama has called on the mother of one of the children massacred inside a Connecticut school in December to deliver his Saturday radio and Internet address. The White House is using an emotional appeal to seek public support for gun control legislation.
With her husband David at her side, Francine Wheeler talked about her six-year-old son, Ben, as only a mother can. Bens love of fun and his excitement at the wonders of life were unmatched. His boundless energy kept him running across the soccer field long after the game was over. And he could not wait to get to school every morning," she said.
Mother Of Slain Newtown Boy Gives White House Weekly Address
Sadly she is toast for me next week. I am so sorry for her loss. But I'll have to take her out. She can cry all she needs to. But her pain and her sorrow cannot and must not over ride the Constitution.
