Obama's Justice Department recommends gun confiscation

[jtpr312]

Good. I hope they do it. That will probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back and leads the people to fight to get their country back. Millions of Americans, including many in law enforcement and the military. would not go along with any govt. gun confiscation. It would lead to a blood bath that would make the 1st Civil War look like a church Ice Cream Social and in the end we'd be a better and stronger nation.

Punks like you are all talk! I figure you for one of those 5' 2" Chihuahua types suffering from "Little Man Syndrome."

Lol, yeah, I hope you leftist scumbags keep right on thinking that nancy.
You are obviously suffering from a known and recognizable mental illness. It's called projection, it's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. There is treatment available you should look into it mary.

 

[jtpr312]

Good. I hope they do it. That will probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back and leads the people to fight to get their country back. Millions of Americans, including many in law enforcement and the military. would not go along with any govt. gun confiscation. It would lead to a blood bath that would make the 1st Civil War look like a church Ice Cream Social and in the end we'd be a better and stronger nation.

You would whimper like the racist pussy you are as you meekly surrender your toys

It's called projection boy. It's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. I think there is treatment available for it, you may want to check that out. Crappy way for you to live your life.

 

[Dubya]

Good. I hope they do it. That will probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back and leads the people to fight to get their country back. Millions of Americans, including many in law enforcement and the military. would not go along with any govt. gun confiscation. It would lead to a blood bath that would make the 1st Civil War look like a church Ice Cream Social and in the end we'd be a better and stronger nation.

Punks like you are all talk! I figure you for one of those 5' 2" Chihuahua types suffering from "Little Man Syndrome."

Lol, yeah, I hope you leftist scumbags keep right on thinking that nancy.
You are obviously suffering from a known and recognizable mental illness. It's called projection, it's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. There is treatment available you should look into it mary.

Look at your avatar and see who's projecting! Try reading all those posts you wrote claiming you're ready for a revolution against the government using small arms! That is mental illness to think a shitbird like you is going to do jack.

 

[jtpr312]

Punks like you are all talk! I figure you for one of those 5' 2" Chihuahua types suffering from "Little Man Syndrome."

Lol, yeah, I hope you leftist scumbags keep right on thinking that nancy.
You are obviously suffering from a known and recognizable mental illness. It's called projection, it's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. There is treatment available you should look into it mary.

Look at your avatar and see who's projecting! Try reading all those posts you wrote claiming you're ready for a revolution against the government using small arms! That is mental illness to think a shitbird like you is going to do jack.

Like I said mary, there's treatment for your malady, seek it out.

 

[editec]

There is a certain demographic which will keep on bleevin the "Obama gun grab" bullshit. Obama's cummin fer yer gunz!

It's like some kind of genetic disorder.

It's a Republican Meme.

 

[martybegan]

Page 8:



Source: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

This is the quote from your video.

There is the whole report in that link, Bigfoot in your Bigmouth. The word mandatory isn't used and is just another NRA lie, which scum like you spread.

The actual memo:

http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

and what do you think a "gun buyback with no exemptions" is? Its confiscation where the government sets the price it pays you for confiscating your gun.

Now this isnt DOJ policy, but it is a study paid for by the DOJ, which is funny because I thought the EVUL NRA stopped that from happening.

You can call it what you want, but what is it? It's an internal report or memo by the division of the DOJ, called the NIC, who evaluate the effectiveness of things pertaining to law enforcement. In this case the report is written by a Deputy Director. From the title of the report and contents it's evident the NIC was evaluating the effectiveness of proposed legislation. So what were the total conclusions about a ban on assault weapons and not some bullshit where a NRA nutter takes one sentence and claims all kinds of bullshit?

Assault weapon ban

Twitter summary: Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime. The existing stock of assault weapons is large, undercutting the effectiveness of bans with exemptions

Goal: Limit access to assault weapons.

Program: Ban the manufacture, sale, transfer, or possession of assault weapons.

Evidence: Guns are durable goods. The 1994 law exempted weapons manufactured before 1994. The exemption of pre-1994 models ensures that a large stock, estimated at 1.5 million, of existing weapons would persist. Prior to the 1994 ban, assault weapons were used in 2-8% of crimes. Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.

Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective. The 1997 Australian gun buyback was massive in scale and, while it appears to have had no effect on gun homicide, Australia has had no mass shootings since the ban was put in place.

Source: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

So what is the analysis saying? It's saying very few homicides are from assault weapons, so even a total elimination isn't going to show a reduction in homicides by guns. A total elimination could be effective for mass shootings.

That's the same analysis for high capacity magazines and similar in analysis to UBC. As long as a large supply of assault weapons and high capacity magazines exists, a ban on manufacturing, transfer and sales is not going to produce noticeable changes. UBC without accountability for possessing a weapons is not going to change things much, except in places like gun shows.

That whole report is just common sense analysis examining all the options.

But it DOES include an option for "no exemption buybacks" which is a weasly way to say confiscation with compensation.

And "could" does not equate enough of a burden to remove a right granted by the consitution. It also requires the "buyback (confiscation)" of every semi automatic rifle out there, which is similar to the joke about something only applying to spherical chickens in a vaccumn.

 

[rightwinger]

Good. I hope they do it. That will probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back and leads the people to fight to get their country back. Millions of Americans, including many in law enforcement and the military. would not go along with any govt. gun confiscation. It would lead to a blood bath that would make the 1st Civil War look like a church Ice Cream Social and in the end we'd be a better and stronger nation.

You would whimper like the racist pussy you are as you meekly surrender your toys

It's called projection boy. It's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. I think there is treatment available for it, you may want to check that out. Crappy way for you to live your life.

Internet tough guy...

"Just let Obama and the entire force of the US Gubmint try and take my guns. They know better than to mess wit me!"

You would cave because at heart, you are a pussy

 

[rightwinger]

Lol, yeah, I hope you leftist scumbags keep right on thinking that nancy.
You are obviously suffering from a known and recognizable mental illness. It's called projection, it's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. There is treatment available you should look into it mary.

Look at your avatar and see who's projecting! Try reading all those posts you wrote claiming you're ready for a revolution against the government using small arms! That is mental illness to think a shitbird like you is going to do jack.

Like I said mary, there's treatment for your malady, seek it out.

There is a treatment for your malady...

Its called ridicule

 

[Dubya]

The actual memo:

http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

and what do you think a "gun buyback with no exemptions" is? Its confiscation where the government sets the price it pays you for confiscating your gun.

Now this isnt DOJ policy, but it is a study paid for by the DOJ, which is funny because I thought the EVUL NRA stopped that from happening.

You can call it what you want, but what is it? It's an internal report or memo by the division of the DOJ, called the NIJ, who evaluate the effectiveness of things pertaining to law enforcement. In this case the report is written by a Deputy Director. From the title of the report and contents it's evident the NIJ was evaluating the effectiveness of proposed legislation. So what were the total conclusions about a ban on assault weapons and not some bullshit where a NRA nutter takes one sentence and claims all kinds of bullshit?

Assault weapon ban

Twitter summary: Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime. The existing stock of assault weapons is large, undercutting the effectiveness of bans with exemptions

Goal: Limit access to assault weapons.

Program: Ban the manufacture, sale, transfer, or possession of assault weapons.

Evidence: Guns are durable goods. The 1994 law exempted weapons manufactured before 1994. The exemption of pre-1994 models ensures that a large stock, estimated at 1.5 million, of existing weapons would persist. Prior to the 1994 ban, assault weapons were used in 2-8% of crimes. Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.

Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective. The 1997 Australian gun buyback was massive in scale and, while it appears to have had no effect on gun homicide, Australia has had no mass shootings since the ban was put in place.

Source: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

So what is the analysis saying? It's saying very few homicides are from assault weapons, so even a total elimination isn't going to show a reduction in homicides by guns. A total elimination could be effective for mass shootings.

That's the same analysis for high capacity magazines and similar in analysis to UBC. As long as a large supply of assault weapons and high capacity magazines exists, a ban on manufacturing, transfer and sales is not going to produce noticeable changes. UBC without accountability for possessing a weapons is not going to change things much, except in places like gun shows.

That whole report is just common sense analysis examining all the options.

But it DOES include an option for "no exemption buybacks" which is a weasly way to say confiscation with compensation.

And "could" does not equate enough of a burden to remove a right granted by the consitution. It also requires the "buyback (confiscation)" of every semi automatic rifle out there, which is similar to the joke about something only applying to spherical chickens in a vaccumn.

Why don't you look up what the NIJ's job is and stop being a fool?

The could involves their assessment of whether it would work.

How can people be as stupid as you people are?

 

[martybegan]

You can call it what you want, but what is it? It's an internal report or memo by the division of the DOJ, called the NIC, who evaluate the effectiveness of things pertaining to law enforcement. In this case the report is written by a Deputy Director. From the title of the report and contents it's evident the NIC was evaluating the effectiveness of proposed legislation. So what were the total conclusions about a ban on assault weapons and not some bullshit where a NRA nutter takes one sentence and claims all kinds of bullshit?



Source: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

So what is the analysis saying? It's saying very few homicides are from assault weapons, so even a total elimination isn't going to show a reduction in homicides by guns. A total elimination could be effective for mass shootings.

That's the same analysis for high capacity magazines and similar in analysis to UBC. As long as a large supply of assault weapons and high capacity magazines exists, a ban on manufacturing, transfer and sales is not going to produce noticeable changes. UBC without accountability for possessing a weapons is not going to change things much, except in places like gun shows.

That whole report is just common sense analysis examining all the options.

But it DOES include an option for "no exemption buybacks" which is a weasly way to say confiscation with compensation.

And "could" does not equate enough of a burden to remove a right granted by the consitution. It also requires the "buyback (confiscation)" of every semi automatic rifle out there, which is similar to the joke about something only applying to spherical chickens in a vaccumn.

Why don't you look up what the NIJ's job is and stop being a fool?

I know it is not the justice department, however it is a "study" given to the DOJ regarding gun control, and one of its conclusions is that only mandatory buybacks would reduce the number of "assault" weapons on the street, and this MIGHT reduce mass shootings, but would have no statistical impact on gun violence.

There are people who try to lull gun rights supporters into complacence by saying "we would never THINK of taking away your guns." Well this study sure is "thinking" about it.

 

[Dubya]

But it DOES include an option for "no exemption buybacks" which is a weasly way to say confiscation with compensation.

And "could" does not equate enough of a burden to remove a right granted by the consitution. It also requires the "buyback (confiscation)" of every semi automatic rifle out there, which is similar to the joke about something only applying to spherical chickens in a vaccumn.

Why don't you look up what the NIJ's job is and stop being a fool?

I know it is not the justice department, however it is a "study" given to the DOJ regarding gun control, and one of its conclusions is that only mandatory buybacks would reduce the number of "assault" weapons on the street, and this MIGHT reduce mass shootings, but would have no statistical impact on gun violence.

There are people who try to lull gun rights supporters into complacence by saying "we would never THINK of taking away your guns." Well this study sure is "thinking" about it.

It's a report and not a study. They used the word could, because there is not data available from studies to truly assess it. What if other means of mass killing were tried, besides assault weapons?

Listen real closely, you idiot! That "study", you call it, is only an inter-department report that was leaked. It's their job to examine all possibilities and the assess possible results.

Can you dumbasses figure out the government may be concerned with a young generation brought up on video games and not having their heads on straight. There was a school shooting foiled in Florida recently involving two guys conspiring to shoot up the school. They both were hearing voices and played that game, I think it was "Call of Duty." I see a trend, so why wouldn't they?

It's the government's job to anticipate problems in law enforcement and possible solutions. Everything in that report makes sense. As long as large amounts of dangerous weapons are common in America, we aren't going to stop the violence from them while that quantity still exists.

Is it a lie to claim that report recommends mandatory buy back? It is a lie and that report is only reporting an honest assessment of outcomes. It's basically saying there is so much shit out there that allowing it to remain can only produce changes over long periods of time as things wear out.

 

[jtpr312]

You would whimper like the racist pussy you are as you meekly surrender your toys

It's called projection boy. It's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. I think there is treatment available for it, you may want to check that out. Crappy way for you to live your life.

Internet tough guy...

"Just let Obama and the entire force of the US Gubmint try and take my guns. They know better than to mess wit me!"

You would cave because at heart, you are a pussy

Well I see you didn't take my advice and seek treatment. Didn't think you would, most who suffer from your mental disease actually like to live out of touch with reality. Carry on mary.

 

[rightwinger]

It's called projection boy. It's when a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others. I think there is treatment available for it, you may want to check that out. Crappy way for you to live your life.

Internet tough guy...

"Just let Obama and the entire force of the US Gubmint try and take my guns. They know better than to mess wit me!"

You would cave because at heart, you are a pussy

Well I see you didn't take my advice and seek treatment. Didn't think you would, most who suffer from your mental disease actually like to live out of touch with reality. Carry on mary.

When it comes time to confiscate your guns your Mangina will take over and you will meekly hand them over. Like most gun owners, your tough guy persona will quickly dissolve

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is a certain demographic which will keep on bleevin the "Obama gun grab" bullshit. Obama's cummin fer yer gunz!

It's like some kind of genetic disorder.

Would that be the sane demographic? Not a single person has ever presented anything Obama has ever said that shows he wouldn't like to ban guns, yet people like you keep insisting he wouldn't do so if he could figure out a way to do it without any evidence to support your argument. Fuck, even Biden thinks Obama wants to ban guns, which is why he promised he wouldn't let it happen.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Just how much brain damage do you and the guy in the video have?

A gun buyback program is not "mandatory gun confiscation".

"Obama's Experts" just blew their own credibility out of the water and ricocheted off the moon!

LOL> WTF? Your're nuts!

Am I? Then it should be easy to prove it.

The guy in the video is from the NRA-ILA. Here is the link to the document he was talking about, found on their own site: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Please show us where it says the Justice Dept recommends confiscating guns.

Quote the exact part.

Go on.

I would guess that English is not your best subject.

Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is
large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun
buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Am I? Then it should be easy to prove it.

The guy in the video is from the NRA-ILA. Here is the link to the document he was talking about, found on their own site: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Please show us where it says the Justice Dept recommends confiscating guns.

Quote the exact part.

Go on.

Mandatory gun buy backs. Do you even understand what that means? You want to toss out your usual Homo-rage personal attacks rather then addressing the contents of the video.

The only difference between a mandatory gun buy back and confiscation is they pay you for it in a "buy back."

At a price set by the government.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Go ahead. Quote it. The exact part.

Prove me wrong.

You have no clue what a buyback program is, do you?

Read it. I dare you to find the word "mandatory" anywhere in there.

You are being lied to, and you drank the piss and regurgitated it like a good little parrot.

And the way you are behaving, you deserve to be lied to.

You need to slow down on your piss drinking intake there fella. The video I posted and the link you posted say the same thing.

You clearly cannot find anything in the DOJ report recommending a mandatory confiscation.

Post it. Go ahead. It should be easy.

Just because you can't read does not mean I can't.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Am I? Then it should be easy to prove it.

The guy in the video is from the NRA-ILA. Here is the link to the document he was talking about, found on their own site: http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Please show us where it says the Justice Dept recommends confiscating guns.

Quote the exact part.

Go on.

Mandatory gun buy backs. Do you even understand what that means? You want to toss out your usual Homo-rage personal attacks rather then addressing the contents of the video.

Nonsense.

The government can’t ‘mandate’ buy backs absent some form of due process, a legitimate public purpose, and just compensation.

That was the funniest thing you ever wrote.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You need to slow down on your piss drinking intake there fella. The video I posted and the link you posted say the same thing.

No, they don't.

The NRA shill says the DOJ says the gun ban won't work without a "mandatory gun buyback".

The word mandatory does not appear anywhere in the DOJ report.

At the point in the video this picture appears, the NRA shill says, "Mandatory gun buyback. That's government confiscation of legal firearms owned by honest citizens".

This is a willful lie.

That is not what a buyback is. He is lying, and you are an idiot for believing his lie.

Willful ignorance. Can you explain in any way what the difference between "mandatory gun buyback" And Buyback with no exceptions" is?

 

[whitehall]

Remember how Clinton's "justice dept" confiscated guns in Waco Texas?