Terrorist Mateen On FBI Watch List, But Still Able to Buy Guns - This Must Change

[ogibillm]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

 

[ogibillm]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because libtards are trying to prevent the blame from going where it belongs (Obama) and putting it on an ideological enemy instead.

please, explain what you believe the president could have done that he did not

Read the OP.

The President sets the procedure for enforcing laws duly passed by Congress unless Congress specifies.

Funny you recognize that now. but the president still doesn't have control over whether or not a suspected terrorist can buy a gun

 

[jc456]

A suspect in a domestic abuse case would have his guns removed automatically but there is no federal venue to keep a freaking suspected terrorist from purchasing firearms because Barry Hussein doesn't want to anger the Islamic jihad community and the freaking Daily News blames the NRA. Convoluted left wing thinking at it's most notorious.

Nope....thank the NRA.

huh?

 

[ogibillm]

GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

 

[J.E.D]

A suspect in a domestic abuse case would have his guns removed automatically but there is no federal venue to keep a freaking suspected terrorist from purchasing firearms because Barry Hussein doesn't want to anger the Islamic jihad community and the freaking Daily News blames the NRA. Convoluted left wing thinking at it's most notorious.

Who are you lying to -- yourself or reasonable people who saw through the right's bullshit looking ago? Congressional Republicans and the NRA will not allow the common sense restrictions that you suspiciously advocate for only after this attack

 

[bodecea]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because libtards are trying to prevent the blame from going where it belongs (Obama) and putting it on an ideological enemy instead.

please, explain what you believe the president could have done that he did not

Read the OP.

The President sets the procedure for enforcing laws duly passed by Congress unless Congress specifies.

And what can the President do when Congress doesn't pass a law for him to enforce?

 

[jc456]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

why? because isn't an answer. funny, but not an answer.

 

[jc456]

GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

funny. you should read what it says, here is one line from your link:

"The Feinstein/King legislation is modeled on a 2007 proposal by the George W. Bush administration to allow the attorney general to deny known or suspected terrorists the right to buy guns and explosives.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby allied with Republicans and conservative Democrats, opposes the bill. “The NRA does not want terrorists or dangerous people to have firearms, any suggestion otherwise is offensive and wrong,” spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said in a statement."

The attorney general is not the one that should be making any decisions on lists. I want the FBI at least to have input, and a court order at that. Why are you opposed to that?

BTW, when a name goes on a list, it affects anyone and everyone with that name, and that is what's wrong with lists. Even the no fly list. I could still fly even though my name was on a no fly list.

 

[ogibillm]

GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

funny. you should read what it says, here is one line from your link:

"The Feinstein/King legislation is modeled on a 2007 proposal by the George W. Bush administration to allow the attorney general to deny known or suspected terrorists the right to buy guns and explosives.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby allied with Republicans and conservative Democrats, opposes the bill. “The NRA does not want terrorists or dangerous people to have firearms, any suggestion otherwise is offensive and wrong,” spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said in a statement."

The attorney general is not the one that should be making any decisions on lists. I want the FBI at least to have input, and a court order at that. Why are you opposed to that?

if you believe the nra where is their proposed legislation?

the nra blocked legislation designed to keep dangerous people from getting guns - people we find too dangerous to fly coach but not apparently too dangerous to buy high powered rifles, large capacity magazines, and hundreds of bullets.

 

[WinterBorn]

GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

funny. you should read what it says, here is one line from your link:

"The Feinstein/King legislation is modeled on a 2007 proposal by the George W. Bush administration to allow the attorney general to deny known or suspected terrorists the right to buy guns and explosives.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby allied with Republicans and conservative Democrats, opposes the bill. “The NRA does not want terrorists or dangerous people to have firearms, any suggestion otherwise is offensive and wrong,” spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said in a statement."

The attorney general is not the one that should be making any decisions on lists. I want the FBI at least to have input, and a court order at that. Why are you opposed to that?

BTW, when a name goes on a list, it affects anyone and everyone with that name, and that is what's wrong with lists. Even the no fly list. I could still fly even though my name was on a no fly list.

My name was on a No-Fly list in 2008. It took my getting a lawyer to get it removed. What would they have done with my guns while I was fighting it?

 

[JimBowie1958]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

The whole thing happened ina GUN FREE ZONE, so how doies more restrictions on legal gun owners or more gun free zones help a damned thing?

 

[JimBowie1958]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because libtards are trying to prevent the blame from going where it belongs (Obama) and putting it on an ideological enemy instead.

please, explain what you believe the president could have done that he did not

Read the OP.

The President sets the procedure for enforcing laws duly passed by Congress unless Congress specifies.

Funny you recognize that now. but the president still doesn't have control over whether or not a suspected terrorist can buy a gun

Yes he does, as he can designate people as terrorists and he can change the process to be more effective.

Everything that Obama is not.

 

[jc456]

GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

funny. you should read what it says, here is one line from your link:

"The Feinstein/King legislation is modeled on a 2007 proposal by the George W. Bush administration to allow the attorney general to deny known or suspected terrorists the right to buy guns and explosives.

The National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby allied with Republicans and conservative Democrats, opposes the bill. “The NRA does not want terrorists or dangerous people to have firearms, any suggestion otherwise is offensive and wrong,” spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said in a statement."

The attorney general is not the one that should be making any decisions on lists. I want the FBI at least to have input, and a court order at that. Why are you opposed to that?

if you believe the nra where is their proposed legislation?

the nra blocked legislation designed to keep dangerous people from getting guns - people we find too dangerous to fly coach but not apparently too dangerous to buy high powered rifles, large capacity magazines, and hundreds of bullets.

they agree with background checks. Why didn't the FBI target the guy, he'd only been there three times. funny, the background check didn't stop him. How's that on the NRA?

Again, the name has to be accurate on a list. That no fly list affects everyone with that name. Did you know that? If you're five years old and your name is the same as someone on the list it stops you from getting a ticket. Do you know this? It's why the list idea was friggin not passed. there has to be a better qualifier like for instance someone who's been in the FBI office three times under suspicion.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

A suspect in a domestic abuse case would have his guns removed automatically but there is no federal venue to keep a freaking suspected terrorist from purchasing firearms because Barry Hussein doesn't want to anger the Islamic jihad community and the freaking Daily News blames the NRA. Convoluted left wing thinking at it's most notorious.

Suspects of domestic abuse do not have their guns automatically removed. Someone has to file a restraining order or file charges against someone in order for the law to get involved.

So have a similar filing with a judge and remove this mans rights by designating him an enemy combatant based on his behavior and actions that violate law.

Do you think that joining ISIS is a Constitutional right, or what?

He didn't join ISIS. What laws did he violate before Saturday night?

You don't realize it because you're fairly naïve but what you're talking about is called a police state.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

The whole thing happened ina GUN FREE ZONE, so how doies more restrictions on legal gun owners or more gun free zones help a damned thing?

How fucking stupid. 103 people in a bar with guns. Where do you think this happened, Tombstone? The OK Corral?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

The whole thing happened ina GUN FREE ZONE, so how doies more restrictions on legal gun owners or more gun free zones help a damned thing?

This law helps prosecutors make a case for prosecuting someone who is charged with other crimes in conjunction with carrying a weapon into a gun-free zone.

 

[skookerasbil]

Buy guns stocks NOW!!!

Fucking FLYING off the shelves......... Gun stocks are surging

 

[cereal_killer]

I'm a huge 2A supporter and agree that if someone is on the "list" they should NOT be able to purchase guns. However there should be some protections put in place to make sure Americans rights are not unduly infringed upon.

You touched on it and I would agree with it. Lets say I'm put on the terror watch list. I should not be notified of it and/or aware of it. However, once I go to purchase a gun or guns I should be rejected, notified and given 7 days to contact the authorities. The will then brief me as to why I am on the list and I can either come in for an interview or surrender my right to purchase a firearms(s). If I agree to an interview and still wish to purchase a firearms(s) I will then be charged another fee for a more thorough back ground check that WILL extend to my family/friends.

So can we do the same if you want to vote?

No, no one has used votes for dubious purposes

I beg to disagree. Voting in certain parties and keeping certain people in office for too long can do plenty of harm.

The problem with fees is you can get into the issues we have in NYC, where the fee is designed to discourage people from applying at all.

How about if the check turns up negative, the government owes you 10x the fee you paid, payable in 5 days?

touche'

In regards to a negative return, no refunds. You caught the attention of the authorities enough to flag you as a threat, you pay the price to own a gun. Don't want to get flagged stay the fuck away from unscrupulous people and don't go spouting crazy shit at work/gym/public places/internet. Freedom of speech is fine and dandy but it doesn't come without repercussions in some cases.

 

[martybegan]

I'm a huge 2A supporter and agree that if someone is on the "list" they should NOT be able to purchase guns. However there should be some protections put in place to make sure Americans rights are not unduly infringed upon.

You touched on it and I would agree with it. Lets say I'm put on the terror watch list. I should not be notified of it and/or aware of it. However, once I go to purchase a gun or guns I should be rejected, notified and given 7 days to contact the authorities. The will then brief me as to why I am on the list and I can either come in for an interview or surrender my right to purchase a firearms(s). If I agree to an interview and still wish to purchase a firearms(s) I will then be charged another fee for a more thorough back ground check that WILL extend to my family/friends.

So can we do the same if you want to vote?

No, no one has used votes for dubious purposes

I beg to disagree. Voting in certain parties and keeping certain people in office for too long can do plenty of harm.

The problem with fees is you can get into the issues we have in NYC, where the fee is designed to discourage people from applying at all.

How about if the check turns up negative, the government owes you 10x the fee you paid, payable in 5 days?

touche'

In regards to a negative return, no refunds. You caught the attention of the authorities enough to flag you as a threat, you pay the price to own a gun. Don't want to get flagged stay the fuck away from unscrupulous people and don't go spouting crazy shit at work/gym/public places/internet. Freedom of speech is fine and dandy but it doesn't come without repercussions in some cases.

they why wouldn't some idiot in a locality who doesn't like guns just throw everyone on the "watch" list. Just put everyone on the list, and make it $5000 to do the check to get yourself off it.

NYC does that with handgun permits, even for home use, $1000 and a 3-6 month wait. What would stop them from just making a list and putting everyone on it?

Government should have to pay for its mistakes, and more importantly, its misuse of the power to screw people over.

 

[martybegan]

be sure to thank the nra

why?

because that's where the blame lies

The whole thing happened ina GUN FREE ZONE, so how doies more restrictions on legal gun owners or more gun free zones help a damned thing?

How fucking stupid. 103 people in a bar with guns. Where do you think this happened, Tombstone? The OK Corral?

Actually in those places you checked your gun at a designated location, and the local law enforcement stayed out in force, armed, and with the understanding that they would protect people while said people were unarmed.

It's why most RKBA proponents don't have an issue with restricting carry in places like courthouses and airports. Those are controlled perimeters, that can assure that methods have been taken to make sure everyone who enters is unarmed.