They keep releasing gun criminals, they even release school shooters.....this is insane.

[2aguy]

Nope, she knew what he was, she was even trying to find an institution to take him because she couldn't handle him anymore. That's the point where you get the guns out of the house and stop letting him play first person shooter games.




Except it was approved by Congress, and the Supreme Court upheld it in three different cases.



Bullshit. First most of the world's countries are STILL dictatorships. I don't even really think America is a "democracy", it's a Plutocracy, where five times, we've put idiots in charge the people didn't want.

Most European countries severely limit who can own a gun, and they are freer than we are.. and have less crime.




DGU's are bullshit.

Do you know how I know they are bullshit? because according the FBI's figures, only 200 cases of civilians shooting people are ruled as "Justifiable homicides", and most of them are domestic violence, not a bad guy trying to break into the home.

So you would have to believe there are millions of guys like 2AGuy, who just wank off all day about their dream about some day shooting a bad guy. And 99.9999% of the time, they can restrain themselves from shooting.

Just doesn't pass the laugh test.

The FBI onlly counts bodies on the ground you dishonest asshole....

only 235 really stupid criminals didn't get the hint that they shouldn't attack victims who have guns and can shoot back...the rest are smart enough to run away, surrender, or if they are shot, only wounded...

You moron.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

 

[Smokin' OP]

It isn't on video you fucking dumb ass.....

You dumb shit...here he is mocking everyone with the same gesture, you low intelligence half wit...

You're FOS.
You post a Trump ego/pity rally video of him denying he said it.

'Mocking everyone'?
When were the other times?

You're a moron.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

'All this was an opening salvo in a campaign to get Congress to pass laws forcing lenders to lend to people they would not otherwise lend to and in places where they would not otherwise put their money'.

They didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers?
What did they do?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're FOS.
You post a Trump ego/pity rally video of him denying he said it.

'Mocking everyone'?
When were the other times?

You're a moron.

When were the other times?

In the video......DURR

 

[beagle9]

It makes perfect sense if you are trying to ruin a nation by turning it into a Marxist socialist society.

To have any chance of creating a Marist society that will last, civilian ownership of firearms must be extremely limited.

The democrats are hoping that the rising gun violence rate will finally get the voters to approve draconian gun regulations. Hopefully the voters are smarter than the democrats think they are so the Second Amendment will not be scrapped.

I believe you are exactly right. It just makes to much sense, but how will the nation survive it all ?? Will it be dealt a lethal blow by a thousand cuts, and if so who are the thinker's behind the task at hand ?? Should the nation go into defensive mode in order to stop all the bleeding ??? Otherwise it is highly important now to organize in order to defeat these criminal corrupt officials, but to do so through "peaceful means" (vote their aces out, and take the country back for the people), otherwise if all is true, because innocent lives are at stake, and we've had enough innocent's being killed over the years now.

 

[beagle9]

You vote for a party that allows crazy people to own firearms.

President Donald Trump responded to the El Paso and Dayton mass shootings by insisting Monday that “mental illness pulls the trigger not the gun,” but shortly after taking office he quietly rolled back an Obama-era regulation that would have made it harder for people with mental illness to buy guns.

Trump did so without any fanfare. In fact, the news that Trump had signed the bill was at the bottom of a White House email that alerted the media to other legislation signed by the president.

In a statement, the National Rifle Association said it "welcomes the President's call to address the root causes of the horrific acts of violence that have occurred in our country."

"It has been the NRA’s long-standing position that those who have been adjudicated as a danger to themselves or others should not have access to firearms and should be admitted for treatment," it said.

But two years ago, the NRA insisted the Obama rule infringed on Second Amendment rights to buy guns, even though the regulation specifically targeted people who were diagnosed with mental illness.

The NRA “applauded” Trump’s action at the time and then-executive director Chris Cox said the move “marks a new era for law-abiding gun owners, as we now have a president who respects and supports our arms.”

The Obama rule that Trump nullified had added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their financial affairs to the national background check database.


I guess they had to, Trumpaciles couldn't own a firearm.

Well aside from your political attacks, if Trump made it easier for mental incapable people to buy firearms, then he was wrong for signing such a thing, but just thinking about what the implications are here that you suggest, makes me think that it's bullcrap, and it's somehow being interpreted in this way, but it's not that way at all.

Show us the bill where it says exactly what you say, and then Trump's signature attached to it. Thanks.

 

[2aguy]

You're FOS.
You post a Trump ego/pity rally video of him denying he said it.

'Mocking everyone'?
When were the other times?

You're a moron.

Shithead....the video shows him doing the same gestures for everyone he mocks including Ted Cruz, you doofus......

Are you really this stupid in real life, or just when you post?

 

[2aguy]

Well aside from your political attacks, if Trump made it easier for mental incapable people to buy firearms, then he was wrong for signing such a thing, but just thinking about what the implications are here that you suggest, makes me think that it's bullcrap, and it's somehow being interpreted in this way, but it's not that way at all.

Show us the bill where it says exactly what you say, and then Trump's signature attached to it. Thanks.

He didn't do that....the ACLU and 23 other mental health rights groups supported him signing the bill because it targeted people with issues that wouldn't bar them from owning a gun, but were going to be put on the list simply because the democrats wanted them on the list.....I posted about this...

Gun Control Laws Should Be Fair

But gun control laws, like any law, should be fair, effective and not based on prejudice or stereotype. This rule met none of those criteria.

In this era of “alternative facts,” we must urge politicians to create laws based on reliable evidence and solid data.

The thousands of Americans whose disability benefits are managed by someone else range from young people with depression and financial inexperience to older adults with Down syndrome needing help with a limited budget. But no data — none — show that these individuals have a propensity for violence in general or gun violence in particular.

To the contrary, studies show that people with mental disabilities are less likely to commit firearm crimes than to be the victimsof violence by others.

--------------------------
The ACLU and 23 national disability groups did not oppose this rule because we want more guns in our community. This is about more than guns. Adding more innocent Americans to the National Instant Criminal Background database because of a mental disability is a disturbing trend — one that could be applied to voting, parenting or other rights dearer than gun ownership. We opposed it because it would do little to stem gun violence but do much to harm our civil rights.

 

[Smokin' OP]

They didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers?
What did they do?

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.
They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.
The banks/lenders did that themselves, knowing they could sell the mortgages to Wall Street, which, in turn, bundled mortgages, aka credit default swaps and sold them to unsuspecting buyers.
Subprime mortgages were born on a lie, perpetuated by Wall Street, banks and the loan rating agencies.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Shithead....the video shows him doing the same gestures for everyone he mocks including Ted Cruz, you doofus......

Are you really this stupid in real life, or just when you post?

You're a lying, sack of shit and delusional.
The orange retard talks with his hands, NOTHING like what he did describing the reporter, numbnuts.

When were the other times?

In the video......DURR

DURRR.........You're FOS.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Well aside from your political attacks, if Trump made it easier for mental incapable people to buy firearms, then he was wrong for signing such a thing, but just thinking about what the implications are here that you suggest, makes me think that it's bullcrap, and it's somehow being interpreted in this way, but it's not that way at all.

Show us the bill where it says exactly what you say, and then Trump's signature attached to it. Thanks.

Don't have that, but here WAS the law.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

And here is the undoing.

H.J. Res. 40 undid a Social Security Administration rule requiring the agency to report certain disabled applicants to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Federal law stipulates that anyone "who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution" cannot own a gun. In 2008, George W. Bush signed the NICS Improvement Amendment Act, which mandated federal agencies to report certain disabled individuals to the database. Federally licensed firearms dealers use the database to screen potential gun buyers.

 

[beagle9]

Don't have that, but here WAS the law.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

And here is the undoing.

H.J. Res. 40 undid a Social Security Administration rule requiring the agency to report certain disabled applicants to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Federal law stipulates that anyone "who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution" cannot own a gun. In 2008, George W. Bush signed the NICS Improvement Amendment Act, which mandated federal agencies to report certain disabled individuals to the database. Federally licensed firearms dealers use the database to screen potential gun buyers.

Ok, so where does Trump sign a bill allowing mentally incapable people to buy or be in the possession of a firearm ?? I haven't seen it in your writings or showings yet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.
They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.
The banks/lenders did that themselves, knowing they could sell the mortgages to Wall Street, which, in turn, bundled mortgages, aka credit default swaps and sold them to unsuspecting buyers.
Subprime mortgages were born on a lie, perpetuated by Wall Street, banks and the loan rating agencies.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.

Really?
They didn't stop banks from merging/expanding if they didn't have enough sub-prime or minority loans?

They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.

Oh, they lowered Fannie and Freddie standards, increasing the demand for subprime loans.
Increasing demand for crappy loans doesn't lead to more crappy loans?

Subprime mortgages were born on a lie,

A lie pushed by the federal government.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

Those banks weren't harmed when subprime mortgages defaulted?

 

[Smokin' OP]

Ok, so where does Trump sign a bill allowing mentally incapable people to buy or be in the possession of a firearm ?? I haven't seen it in your writings or showings yet.

At the bottom of the bill.

So, you need video proof?
I don't think it matters to his cult.

 

[2aguy]

You're a lying, sack of shit and delusional.
The orange retard talks with his hands, NOTHING like what he did describing the reporter, numbnuts.


DURRR.........You're FOS.

Are you really this fucking stupid? This has been shown to be a lie, over and over again........either you are too stupid to understand this, or you know it and are simply another left wing troll...

 

[2aguy]

Ok, so where does Trump sign a bill allowing mentally incapable people to buy or be in the possession of a firearm ?? I haven't seen it in your writings or showings yet.

Ok, so where does Trump sign a bill allowing mentally incapable people to buy or be in the possession of a firearm ?? I haven't seen it in your writings or showings yet.

They aren't mentally ill....as my post on this showed, people who have minor issues were being denied access to their 2nd Amendment Rights....they did not change the law for dangerously mentally ill.....that idiot knows it, but like a typical leftist, they ignore the truth, and push the lie.

 

[Smokin' OP]

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.

Really?
They didn't stop banks from merging/expanding if they didn't have enough sub-prime or minority loans?

They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.

Oh, they lowered Fannie and Freddie standards, increasing the demand for subprime loans.
Increasing demand for crappy loans doesn't lead to more crappy loans?

Subprime mortgages were born on a lie,

A lie pushed by the federal government.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

Those banks weren't harmed when subprime mortgages defaulted?

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.

Really?
They didn't stop banks from merging/expanding if they didn't have enough sub-prime or minority loans?

Yes.

They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.

Oh, they lowered Fannie and Freddie standards, increasing the demand for subprime loans.
Increasing demand for crappy loans doesn't lead to more crappy loans?

They had choices and blew it, because they're greedy, every loan they make they get fees.
Knowing they could sell them anyway.

Subprime mortgages were born on a lie,

A lie pushed by the federal government.

No, by banks themselves in part by the government via deregulation.
The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

Those banks weren't harmed when subprime mortgages defaulted?

Not because of loans in their portfolio but by the borrowers, losing their jobs and not being able to pay their mortgage.
So yes they were affected but not because of anything they did.

 

[Smokin' OP]

They aren't mentally ill....as my post on this showed, people who have minor issues were being denied access to their 2nd Amendment Rights....they did not change the law for dangerously mentally ill.....that idiot knows it, but like a typical leftist, they ignore the truth, and push the lie.

You're a lying, fucking moron.

You know WHY they ARE mentally ill?
The Social Security Administration said so.
Do you know why they determined that?
That's how the recipients got Social Security in the first place.
They and their lawyer went in front of the social security disability administrative law judge and said they had mental health issues.
That was their premise for getting S.S. disability, imbecile.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The government didn't push banks to lend to less creditworthy borrowers.

Really?
They didn't stop banks from merging/expanding if they didn't have enough sub-prime or minority loans?

Yes.

They did however push Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac to lower their loan requirements.

Oh, they lowered Fannie and Freddie standards, increasing the demand for subprime loans.
Increasing demand for crappy loans doesn't lead to more crappy loans?

They had choices and blew it, because they're greedy, every loan they make they get fees.
Knowing they could sell them anyway.

Subprime mortgages were born on a lie,

A lie pushed by the federal government.

No, by banks themselves in part by the government via deregulation.
The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.

Community and regional banks were unscathed, most actually held on to a mortgage, instead of selling it.

Those banks weren't harmed when subprime mortgages defaulted?

Not because of loans in their portfolio but by the borrowers, losing their jobs and not being able to pay their mortgage.
So yes they were affected but not because of anything they did.

They had choices and blew it, because they're greedy, every loan they make they get fees.
Knowing they could sell them anyway.

They reacted to new government incentives.
Sounds like the government was at least partially responsible.

No, by banks themselves in part by the government via deregulation.
The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.

Glass-Steagall didn't stop banks from writing or buying crappy mortgages

Not because of loans in their portfolio but by the borrowers, losing their jobs and not being able to pay their mortgage.

But you said they weren't harmed, because they held onto the mortgages.
Were you confused?

So yes they were affected but not because of anything they did.

Were you lying?

 

[2aguy]

You're a lying, fucking moron.

You know WHY they ARE mentally ill?
The Social Security Administration said so.
Do you know why they determined that?
That's how the recipients got Social Security in the first place.
They and their lawyer went in front of the social security disability administrative law judge and said they had mental health issues.
That was their premise for getting S.S. disability, imbecile.

Moron...they have trouble dealing with bills...they don't have trouble with owning a gun....the vets on that list would complain about not being able to sleep and then get their guns taken away, you shitheads use every excuse you can to take Rights away from people.....