Senate Democrats plan to hold the floor to protest inaction on gun legislation

[Slade3200]

Well I somewhat agree with you there but sometimes doing something is better than doing nothing

great. enforce the laws we have. that would be something also.

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

Focus on it.....instead of always focusing on taking guns and magazines away from people who don't use them for crime.

Focus on it? Ok I’m focusing. I’m not seeing what’s going to instigate change though. Any other ideas?

Lol
Legislating with emotion solves nothing

I disagree. Passion and emotion is great behind legislating as long as there is good logic and reason involved

 

[DamnDude]

They had all they needed to put the kid into jail or treatment....how did that work out? The kid should have been kept from having guns because he should have had an arrest record.....but because of obama's Promise Program and the left wing desire to not stigmatize young criminals with actual criminal records, he got the gun....how is that going to change by going after actual normal people who own guns?

I don’t want to go after normal people. I want a better background check and enforcement system so when people like that get flagged something is done. The current system needs to be much better... sounds like you agree

Yep.....and that has nothing to do with banning semi-autos or magazines. We already have all the laws and regulations we need to go after criminals and to keep mass public shooters from targeting gun free zones.

How then would you have handled the parkland kid? What would you have arrested him for? Which law wasn’t followed?

Dear sweet baby Jebus
ANY number of domestic violence laws, Slade.
Where I reside, being underage doesn't allow you to "clear" your record when you come of age when you turn 18. Not when it concerns multiple domestic violence convictions. It carries over with you.
There were at least 39 instances of domestic violence where some form of law enforcement were called out invovling the parkland school shooter... At least 39... And he "legally purchased" his firearm. Someone didn't do their job. He shouldn't have been able to do so. Take any one of those instances and apply it to prevent him from buying a firearm and possibly prevent the massacre from happening.

The mother called the cops every time the brothers got in a fight or threw a fit. It wasn’t always for the shooter kid. The clearest case of violence that I remember is when he pushed his mom into a wall for taking away his xbox. I guessing she didn’t press charges. Would you suggest that the cops arrest him anyways and get him in the system?

YES!!
It's how you get the jackholes on the no buy list... Into the NICS system... Make sure they cannot buy a firearm legally.....
Quit playing nice, especially if they are willing to put their hands on their own mother in anger... If they are willing to show that level of disrespect then what are they willing to do to people they have no feelings for? Oh wait, he showed what he was willing to do, didn't he.
Christ, I can hear you already... He was just a kid...
Well at some point he was taught the difference between right and wrong and made a decision to do wrong...multiple times. Law enforcement called at least 39 times....to the house, and just because they hugged it out doesn't mean law enforcement doesn't have a responsibility to follow through.

 

[DamnDude]

No I didn’t. I was talking about machine guns

Then the AR-15, the civilian AK-47 are not machine guns by any definition......so you don't want those banned...right?

I don’t think so... wouldnt mind hearing a debate about it

That's what this is. So far it's emotions not changing facts.

And let me know if I'm wasting my time asking for the top 5 cities of gun control and how that's faring. That's getting ignored by you more than I was ignored on prom night.

I think gun violence in big cities is a result of poverty and crime and many many other factors... not gun control laws. It’s a much more complicated situation than a simple answer can address

This country does not enforce the laws that we do have, what makes you think more frivolous gun control laws will save a single soul?

I wish I could boost this post more

 

[iceberg]

great. enforce the laws we have. that would be something also.

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

police take advantage of any of what, 39 complaints to do something in this particular case? we now have "red flag laws" that don't even need you on record of doing something wrong, just a complaint and WHAM - come get the guns.

we can't go anywhere via the middle of the road. we want to slam everything through based on our emotional tastes.

Ok good we are getting towards solutions now. So a kid gets in a fight with his brother and the mom calls the cops to help her calm them down. Do both brothers get put on a red flag list? How long do they lose their gun rights for?

I know you don’t have a policy written, just curious of your “top of the head” ideas. I won’t hold you to them... just brainstorming

parkland shooter had far more than kids fighting, now didn't he?

the hardest most difficult part of talking with you is your habit of going apeshit extreme and pulling out very rare scenarios as if they would be the every time occurrence.

Parkland Shooting Suspect: A Story Of Red Flags, Ignored

just stop trying to say this is the same as kids fighting. we can either talk from a centristic standpoint and NOT grandstand to mythical fairy tales or we can't. if you need to keep doing this and 7-11 bullshit, fine. just don't bitch when i wonder how come you feel it's ok for an elected official to delete so much mail after being told to turn it over.

wait - your timeline is different.

in any event, i think it's breaktime for me cause i'm tired of the extreme goose chases you tend to lob out when we're, in my mind, about to get to a point of resolution on something.

I’m not sure what your finding as extreme. I’m asking what specifically you would have arrested the kid for in parkland. If not an arrest for which event should he be flagged and for how long should he be restricted to buy a gun? This is a real world situation that we can use as an example. Isn’t this how you wanted to discuss the topic?! I’m confused about what’s turning you off here

F1 cars racing down the road and buying uzi's at 7-11. doesn't happen yet you keep using them as example of why we need control.

sorry that is confusing to you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nothing else has worked so I don't know where you get the water from. We can't stop the bad guys from getting guns, that much we know. We have hundreds of gun laws on the books already, and state laws add even more. There are certain people not legally allowed to buy guns, but they buy them anyway.

Now if your goal is to reduce casualties and deaths, then the only thing in the past that has done that is another person with a gun.

How many guns do we have in this country? Why aren't we the safest country in the world, then?

Guns don't guarantee everybody will be safe. Nobody is safe in any country. But if you are attacked, having a gun may save your life just as it does hundreds of thousands of times every year in the US.

Do you need an AK with a 100 round mag to feel safe?

Lol
Someon else’s firearm ownership is none of your fucking business

Normally ide agree except for the fact that firearms can be and have been abused to take the lives of innocent people.

So have cars, so have trucks, so have knives, so have bats, so has the internet.

 

[iceberg]

Focus on it.....instead of always focusing on taking guns and magazines away from people who don't use them for crime.

Focus on it? Ok I’m focusing. I’m not seeing what’s going to instigate change though. Any other ideas?

and i don't see how limiting mag capacity is going to stop someone from finding a way to create damage. all this "but it stands to reason..." is people thinking out loud because they can't PROVE the actions they would take would work. so you keep saying "well at least we did something!"

yet when it doesn't work you want to do something else, usually around greater regulation OF WHICH isn't working as planned so doing "something" is a bad path.

People will always be able to inflict damage if they want to. I never suggested that regulating guns would stop all gun violence. It’s one element of a larger problem that I’m open to debate. Not an end all be all solution

F1 race cars and buying guns at 7-11 isn't debating. its lobbing out bullshit to keep FROM debating.

No it’s not to keep from debate, both those examples draw consensus as we both agree that machine guns shouldn't be sold at 711 and F1 cars shouldn't be on our roads. That’s called common ground that justifies regulation as a useful tool.

You said you don’t understand how limiting mag capacity would stop damage. You digressed to an absolutist argument. Of course it won’t stop damage but it would reduce it. so I brought up the levels that exist in regulation, firepower, and damage control... that’s a fair argument

asking you to link limited mag to lowered shootings isn't absolutionist. it's making sure what we do will have the desired outcome. your "desired" outcome seems nothing more than regulation and control and IF THAT HAPPENS TO ALSO HELP, great.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

great. enforce the laws we have. that would be something also.

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

Focus on it.....instead of always focusing on taking guns and magazines away from people who don't use them for crime.

Focus on it? Ok I’m focusing. I’m not seeing what’s going to instigate change though. Any other ideas?

and i don't see how limiting mag capacity is going to stop someone from finding a way to create damage. all this "but it stands to reason..." is people thinking out loud because they can't PROVE the actions they would take would work. so you keep saying "well at least we did something!"

yet when it doesn't work you want to do something else, usually around greater regulation OF WHICH isn't working as planned so doing "something" is a bad path.

People will always be able to inflict damage if they want to. I never suggested that regulating guns would stop all gun violence. It’s one element of a larger problem that I’m open to debate. Not an end all be all solution

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is why my (our) stance is that it's not going to stop with any particular regulation(s). It's just the first step in a long list of regulations.

 

[iceberg]

great. enforce the laws we have. that would be something also.

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

Focus on it.....instead of always focusing on taking guns and magazines away from people who don't use them for crime.

Focus on it? Ok I’m focusing. I’m not seeing what’s going to instigate change though. Any other ideas?

Lol
Legislating with emotion solves nothing

I disagree. Passion and emotion is great behind legislating as long as there is good logic and reason involved

i seldom do the right thing in fits of passion. i satisfy my passion. i have seen that to be a human trait and you keep confusing your passions for my limitations in life.

not playing that game.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Lol
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it, There’s nothing more personal than firearm ownership. Progressives like yourself need to stay the fuck out of people’s personal lives.

There’s plenty things that are more personal than firearm ownership. Most glaringly losing a loved one to gun violence

not if you use that unfortunate and yes sad situation to take power from those who did nothing wrong at all. as far as i'm concerned you're about as bad as the shooter for being such an opportunist. esp when you can't correlate your "suggestions" into anything that would have stopped said event from happening.

"well we did something..." isn't good enough.

Well I’m not interested in taking away a responsible citizens right to own a firearm so we are all good there

but limiting how they can use it you're all up into if i understand you correctly.

Yeah I’m fine limiting their ability to have weapons capable of inflicting a massive amount of damage if misused. Same
Concept as the machine gun restrictions and same reason why F1 race cars are not allowed on the road

Machine guns are not needed for personal self-defense. Neither are grenades or rocket launchers.

 

[iceberg]

There’s plenty things that are more personal than firearm ownership. Most glaringly losing a loved one to gun violence

not if you use that unfortunate and yes sad situation to take power from those who did nothing wrong at all. as far as i'm concerned you're about as bad as the shooter for being such an opportunist. esp when you can't correlate your "suggestions" into anything that would have stopped said event from happening.

"well we did something..." isn't good enough.

Well I’m not interested in taking away a responsible citizens right to own a firearm so we are all good there

but limiting how they can use it you're all up into if i understand you correctly.

Yeah I’m fine limiting their ability to have weapons capable of inflicting a massive amount of damage if misused. Same
Concept as the machine gun restrictions and same reason why F1 race cars are not allowed on the road

Machine guns are not needed for personal self-defense. Neither are grenades or rocket launchers.

we can't talk middle ground. we gotta keep buying our nukes at 7-11 as a point of reference.

 

[Slade3200]

I don’t want to go after normal people. I want a better background check and enforcement system so when people like that get flagged something is done. The current system needs to be much better... sounds like you agree

Yep.....and that has nothing to do with banning semi-autos or magazines. We already have all the laws and regulations we need to go after criminals and to keep mass public shooters from targeting gun free zones.

How then would you have handled the parkland kid? What would you have arrested him for? Which law wasn’t followed?

Dear sweet baby Jebus
ANY number of domestic violence laws, Slade.
Where I reside, being underage doesn't allow you to "clear" your record when you come of age when you turn 18. Not when it concerns multiple domestic violence convictions. It carries over with you.
There were at least 39 instances of domestic violence where some form of law enforcement were called out invovling the parkland school shooter... At least 39... And he "legally purchased" his firearm. Someone didn't do their job. He shouldn't have been able to do so. Take any one of those instances and apply it to prevent him from buying a firearm and possibly prevent the massacre from happening.

The mother called the cops every time the brothers got in a fight or threw a fit. It wasn’t always for the shooter kid. The clearest case of violence that I remember is when he pushed his mom into a wall for taking away his xbox. I guessing she didn’t press charges. Would you suggest that the cops arrest him anyways and get him in the system?

YES!!
It's how you get the jackholes on the no buy list... Into the NICS system... Make sure they cannot buy a firearm legally.....
Quit playing nice, especially if they are willing to put their hands on their own mother in anger... If they are willing to show that level of disrespect then what are they willing to do to people they have no feelings for? Oh wait, he showed what he was willing to do, didn't he.
Christ, I can hear you already... He was just a kid...
Well at some point he was taught the difference between right and wrong and made a decision to do wrong...multiple times. Law enforcement called at least 39 times....to the house, and just because they hugged it out doesn't mean law enforcement doesn't have a responsibility to follow through.

No way, I’m not making excuses for that psycho. I wish he would have been on a no buy list. I’m just trying to drill down the details to see if rules were not followed or if new rules need to be made. Were the cops not doing their jobs by not arresting this kid after he pushed his mom?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What warning signs? He went through 3 separate interviews with the FBI, a Comprehensive FBI background investigation and an under cover approach...and they cleared him...what warning signs?

Pulse... sorry I was thinking Parkland

They had all they needed to put the kid into jail or treatment....how did that work out? The kid should have been kept from having guns because he should have had an arrest record.....but because of obama's Promise Program and the left wing desire to not stigmatize young criminals with actual criminal records, he got the gun....how is that going to change by going after actual normal people who own guns?

I don’t want to go after normal people. I want a better background check and enforcement system so when people like that get flagged something is done. The current system needs to be much better... sounds like you agree

Half the time it's the normal people you have to worry about that will commit a mass murder.

Well they aren’t normal in my book if they are committing mass murder

True. But the government sees them as normal enough to allow them to purchase firearms.

 

[Slade3200]

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

police take advantage of any of what, 39 complaints to do something in this particular case? we now have "red flag laws" that don't even need you on record of doing something wrong, just a complaint and WHAM - come get the guns.

we can't go anywhere via the middle of the road. we want to slam everything through based on our emotional tastes.

Ok good we are getting towards solutions now. So a kid gets in a fight with his brother and the mom calls the cops to help her calm them down. Do both brothers get put on a red flag list? How long do they lose their gun rights for?

I know you don’t have a policy written, just curious of your “top of the head” ideas. I won’t hold you to them... just brainstorming

parkland shooter had far more than kids fighting, now didn't he?

the hardest most difficult part of talking with you is your habit of going apeshit extreme and pulling out very rare scenarios as if they would be the every time occurrence.

Parkland Shooting Suspect: A Story Of Red Flags, Ignored

just stop trying to say this is the same as kids fighting. we can either talk from a centristic standpoint and NOT grandstand to mythical fairy tales or we can't. if you need to keep doing this and 7-11 bullshit, fine. just don't bitch when i wonder how come you feel it's ok for an elected official to delete so much mail after being told to turn it over.

wait - your timeline is different.

in any event, i think it's breaktime for me cause i'm tired of the extreme goose chases you tend to lob out when we're, in my mind, about to get to a point of resolution on something.

I’m not sure what your finding as extreme. I’m asking what specifically you would have arrested the kid for in parkland. If not an arrest for which event should he be flagged and for how long should he be restricted to buy a gun? This is a real world situation that we can use as an example. Isn’t this how you wanted to discuss the topic?! I’m confused about what’s turning you off here

F1 cars racing down the road and buying uzi's at 7-11. doesn't happen yet you keep using them as example of why we need control.

sorry that is confusing to you.

Yes, both examples should draw consensus that regulations are helpful and necessary. That seemed to get lost in these discussions when it goes to the “all or nothing” arguments

 

[Slade3200]

How many guns do we have in this country? Why aren't we the safest country in the world, then?

Guns don't guarantee everybody will be safe. Nobody is safe in any country. But if you are attacked, having a gun may save your life just as it does hundreds of thousands of times every year in the US.

Do you need an AK with a 100 round mag to feel safe?

Lol
Someon else’s firearm ownership is none of your fucking business

Normally ide agree except for the fact that firearms can be and have been abused to take the lives of innocent people.

So have cars, so have trucks, so have knives, so have bats, so has the internet.

Agreed, what’s your point

 

[Slade3200]

Excellent idea, how do we do better at that?

Focus on it.....instead of always focusing on taking guns and magazines away from people who don't use them for crime.

Focus on it? Ok I’m focusing. I’m not seeing what’s going to instigate change though. Any other ideas?

and i don't see how limiting mag capacity is going to stop someone from finding a way to create damage. all this "but it stands to reason..." is people thinking out loud because they can't PROVE the actions they would take would work. so you keep saying "well at least we did something!"

yet when it doesn't work you want to do something else, usually around greater regulation OF WHICH isn't working as planned so doing "something" is a bad path.

People will always be able to inflict damage if they want to. I never suggested that regulating guns would stop all gun violence. It’s one element of a larger problem that I’m open to debate. Not an end all be all solution

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is why my (our) stance is that it's not going to stop with any particular regulation(s). It's just the first step in a long list of regulations.

Well there we go... I get to finally hit the agree button for good ol Ray. Hell has officially frozen over

 

[DamnDude]

Yep.....and that has nothing to do with banning semi-autos or magazines. We already have all the laws and regulations we need to go after criminals and to keep mass public shooters from targeting gun free zones.

How then would you have handled the parkland kid? What would you have arrested him for? Which law wasn’t followed?

Dear sweet baby Jebus
ANY number of domestic violence laws, Slade.
Where I reside, being underage doesn't allow you to "clear" your record when you come of age when you turn 18. Not when it concerns multiple domestic violence convictions. It carries over with you.
There were at least 39 instances of domestic violence where some form of law enforcement were called out invovling the parkland school shooter... At least 39... And he "legally purchased" his firearm. Someone didn't do their job. He shouldn't have been able to do so. Take any one of those instances and apply it to prevent him from buying a firearm and possibly prevent the massacre from happening.

The mother called the cops every time the brothers got in a fight or threw a fit. It wasn’t always for the shooter kid. The clearest case of violence that I remember is when he pushed his mom into a wall for taking away his xbox. I guessing she didn’t press charges. Would you suggest that the cops arrest him anyways and get him in the system?

YES!!
It's how you get the jackholes on the no buy list... Into the NICS system... Make sure they cannot buy a firearm legally.....
Quit playing nice, especially if they are willing to put their hands on their own mother in anger... If they are willing to show that level of disrespect then what are they willing to do to people they have no feelings for? Oh wait, he showed what he was willing to do, didn't he.
Christ, I can hear you already... He was just a kid...
Well at some point he was taught the difference between right and wrong and made a decision to do wrong...multiple times. Law enforcement called at least 39 times....to the house, and just because they hugged it out doesn't mean law enforcement doesn't have a responsibility to follow through.

No way, I’m not making excuses for that psycho. I wish he would have been on a no buy list. I’m just trying to drill down the details to see if rules were not followed or if new rules need to be made. Were the cops not doing their jobs by not arresting this kid after he pushed his mom?

Come on man, I'm not going to play that game with you.
39 times.
39
If you can't figure it out then it's you, not me.

 

[Slade3200]

There’s plenty things that are more personal than firearm ownership. Most glaringly losing a loved one to gun violence

not if you use that unfortunate and yes sad situation to take power from those who did nothing wrong at all. as far as i'm concerned you're about as bad as the shooter for being such an opportunist. esp when you can't correlate your "suggestions" into anything that would have stopped said event from happening.

"well we did something..." isn't good enough.

Well I’m not interested in taking away a responsible citizens right to own a firearm so we are all good there

but limiting how they can use it you're all up into if i understand you correctly.

Yeah I’m fine limiting their ability to have weapons capable of inflicting a massive amount of damage if misused. Same
Concept as the machine gun restrictions and same reason why F1 race cars are not allowed on the road

Machine guns are not needed for personal self-defense. Neither are grenades or rocket launchers.

We are on a roll! Did somebody hijack your account?!

 

[Slade3200]

Pulse... sorry I was thinking Parkland

They had all they needed to put the kid into jail or treatment....how did that work out? The kid should have been kept from having guns because he should have had an arrest record.....but because of obama's Promise Program and the left wing desire to not stigmatize young criminals with actual criminal records, he got the gun....how is that going to change by going after actual normal people who own guns?

I don’t want to go after normal people. I want a better background check and enforcement system so when people like that get flagged something is done. The current system needs to be much better... sounds like you agree

Half the time it's the normal people you have to worry about that will commit a mass murder.

Well they aren’t normal in my book if they are committing mass murder

True. But the government sees them as normal enough to allow them to purchase firearms.

Boom, there’s a problem that we can work on. How do we make that better and flag high risk people so we can not allow them to buy guns?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They just know if they pass a law, those gangbangers will hand in their guns all on their own. Like any good democrat would.
View attachment 279806

Sounds like you’re missing the point all together. If you think gun control advocates assume gang bangers will turn in their guns then you are a world away from understanding their position. Try listening more and talking less

then why do they keep saying they want them out of the hands of the criminals if "gang bangers" are not the intended "criminal"?

I don’t support confiscation but my understanding of their position is they see over the top dangerous weapons made for war being used in these mass shootings and they want to take them out of circulation. The criminal element is a separate problem that needs to be dealt with by law enforcement.

Lol
Haven’t you learned by now the least efficient most corrupt way in doing anything is let the federal government control it

Well I somewhat agree with you there but sometimes doing something is better than doing nothing

Not when that "something" isn't nearly enough.

 

[Slade3200]

How then would you have handled the parkland kid? What would you have arrested him for? Which law wasn’t followed?

Dear sweet baby Jebus
ANY number of domestic violence laws, Slade.
Where I reside, being underage doesn't allow you to "clear" your record when you come of age when you turn 18. Not when it concerns multiple domestic violence convictions. It carries over with you.
There were at least 39 instances of domestic violence where some form of law enforcement were called out invovling the parkland school shooter... At least 39... And he "legally purchased" his firearm. Someone didn't do their job. He shouldn't have been able to do so. Take any one of those instances and apply it to prevent him from buying a firearm and possibly prevent the massacre from happening.

The mother called the cops every time the brothers got in a fight or threw a fit. It wasn’t always for the shooter kid. The clearest case of violence that I remember is when he pushed his mom into a wall for taking away his xbox. I guessing she didn’t press charges. Would you suggest that the cops arrest him anyways and get him in the system?

YES!!
It's how you get the jackholes on the no buy list... Into the NICS system... Make sure they cannot buy a firearm legally.....
Quit playing nice, especially if they are willing to put their hands on their own mother in anger... If they are willing to show that level of disrespect then what are they willing to do to people they have no feelings for? Oh wait, he showed what he was willing to do, didn't he.
Christ, I can hear you already... He was just a kid...
Well at some point he was taught the difference between right and wrong and made a decision to do wrong...multiple times. Law enforcement called at least 39 times....to the house, and just because they hugged it out doesn't mean law enforcement doesn't have a responsibility to follow through.

No way, I’m not making excuses for that psycho. I wish he would have been on a no buy list. I’m just trying to drill down the details to see if rules were not followed or if new rules need to be made. Were the cops not doing their jobs by not arresting this kid after he pushed his mom?

Come on man, I'm not going to play that game with you.
39 times.
39
If you can't figure it out then it's you, not me.

Doesn’t sound like you care about specifics. 39 means nothing without context. What if they just needed help getting their cat out of a tree 39 times? We already nailed down a violent act. He pushed his mom, there is a report on it. Cops said they didn’t have enough for an arrest. Should they be punished for not doing their job? Does a new protocol need to be put in place?