Mock

(06-21-2016, 03:23 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]^ well, let's specify models then. it really won't be that hard.

In other countries the lines are VERY clear. Guns that can be used for hunting are legal. Military grade weapons are not. Now THAT is a clear line. Why reinvent the wheel when the heavy lifting has already been done?

(06-22-2016, 02:49 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-21-2016, 03:23 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]^ well, let's specify models then. it really won't be that hard.

In other countries the lines are VERY clear. Guns that can be used for hunting are legal. Military grade weapons are not. Now THAT is a clear line.

First and foremost, I'm not for grabbing anyone's guns.

I realize that 99.5% of all guns purchased legally in this country will never be involved in any sort of crime.

But, I feel there should be common sense applied to the 2^nd.

Military grade weapons (anything similar to the M-16 let's say) are not available to the public.

How many other types of guns does that leave for sportsmen, home/personal protection, etc.?

I understand gun mnaufacturer's not liking any sort of legislation that would limit what can be sold, but how can normal, everyday, rational gun owners not see that something needs to be done?

I understand someone can kill many people with a handgun (or 2 or 3), but let's make them do it that way.

There's a solution out there, but there are some incredibly stubborn, short-sighted people who just won't listen to reason.

(06-22-2016, 02:10 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

Right now there is a sit-in on the House floor. Those people want to force a vote on gun control. They want some common sense laws.

Why is it that only Democrats are speaking up about the gun violence?

What they want is a vote on what they want not just a vote that's been done. They are acting like petulant children.

I think banning folks on the no fly list from buying guns is good and that the notion that that 1 guy that be on the list and not know and that somehow will foul some big secret investigation is Stupid. If the fucker can't be trusted on a plane he damn sure can't be trusted with a gun.
I am also on record for being For "Common Sense" gun laws, but who decides?
What determines an "Assault Weapon"? There are already govt sanctioned descriptions and an AR15 does not fit that description.
Any ban of anykind from what we have now should based in Facts, not conjecture. The idea that limiting a guy to a 10 round mag instead of 30 is based on the idea that it will take much longer to fire off 30 rounds if they are in 3 different mags and that that extra time would enable some civic minded citizen to take advantage of that reload time to rush the shooter. Thats naive in the extreme. A shooter busts off 10 rounds in 8 seconds or so, takes 2 to 3 seconds to drop the empty and slap in a new one is wishful thinking, would YOU be able to 1 Recognize that the shooter is reloading, 2 get your plan together and then 3 Rush and over power him? I think not. The time difference between 1 30 rnd mag and 3 10 rnd mags is maybe 5 or 6 seconds total.
So they Do ban 30 rnd mags, there are millions of them out there. How in the hell would that be enforced? No serial numbers, no tracking, no idea who has what? The only time you would see them its too late.
The democrats are the loudest ones speaking up about gun violence, they are also the biggest perpetrators.
They are also the most violent in out society and most frequent victims. So, maybe lets disarm the dems?
The orlando guy was a dem. He was investigated by the FBI who were told to back off by a Dem run state dept. The mosks that were being investigated for terrorist ties cried because they were being singled out as being muslim so the dem run state dept halted the FBI investigations.
The assholes rioting at Trump rallys are dems
The fine folks in detroit are dems
Chicago, Ferguson....

So what I see is the folks doing all the killing and the like are dem and/or crazy

(06-22-2016, 02:42 PM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]They don't own guns? Kelly Ayotte is not walking lock step and a few others. Dems never change party positions and they usually drink from the same well.
When they don't get their way in any bill they blame the pubs and say they are to blame no matter what they are trying to pass. like budgets and spending they blame the pubs for their mismanagement on a variety of issues.

Actually, that's not accurate Mags. I looked up the votes last night, a couple of them surprised me too.

--Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat of North Dakota, voted against the terror watch list bill and the background checks bill.
--Senator John Tester of Montana, and Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, both Democrats, both voted against the background checks bill.

However, I agree with you that today's sit-in is a political ploy to help Democrats win Congressional seats next year.

Last night, I read about a female Republican senator who is working quickly to get a bipartisan 'No Fly, No Buy' bill drafted and submitted. Even Lindsey Graham, typically a friend of the NRA and a semi-automatic rifle owner himself, made a statement directed at the NRA in support of the bill.

Graham stated that it was more important to stop a terrorist from buying a gun than to worry about someone who was 'mistakenly' on the list not getting one, especially since there is a quick appeal process for such mistakes included in the compromise bill (my paraphrase). He's right, in my opinion.

I think the Dems truly care about gun control supported by the vast majority of the population (including the majority of Republicans and gun owners). BUT, I suspect the Dems organized the sit in today, at least in part, so they can be viewed as the only party with members dedicated to doing the right thing; the Dems didn't want to let a Republican-led bi-partisan bill get focus/credit. That's my suspicion, not a fact.

At any rate, the "No Fly, No Buy" policy is a no-brainer and I believe Republicans will support it to save their assess in Congressional elections (and, for some of them, because they truly care about public safety).

The NRA isn't budging on their objection to that policy. But, times are changing. I'm convinced that some GOPers now realize that doing whatever the NRA wants -- in order to maintain the NRAs backing and to avoid the relentless NRA attacks on those who dare to defy them -- could cost them their seats and could cause the Republicans to lose majority status in Congress. I look forward to watching the gradual erosion of the NRA's ability to buy and strong-arm politicians. Our Congresspersons should represent those who elected them, not cater to an overbearing special interest group which continues to be out of step with the will of the people.

(06-22-2016, 03:55 PM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-22-2016, 02:10 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

Right now there is a sit-in on the House floor. Those people want to force a vote on gun control. They want some common sense laws.

Why is it that only Democrats are speaking up about the gun violence?

What they want is a vote on what they want not just a vote that's been done. They are acting like petulant children.

As I said before, I am just too tired to debate this anymore so I will leave it to you young whippersnappers........however, Maggs, you made me chuckle, when you say, the Demos are acting like petulant children? Are you nuts? Have you been watching the same news I have been watching over last couple years? Surely you jest....
You know you said that shit to stir the pot so I can overlook it.

My, my, my, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine...

Singular focus, never the big picture or society as a whole.

Talk about petulant children.

(06-22-2016, 04:53 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: [ -> ]So what I see is the folks doing all the killing and the like are dem and/or crazy

You seriously see that, Six? Eye drops, man.

Or, read up on the mass murderers in the public shooting thread or in the news. What you see doesn't match reality.

Just off the top of my head, one of the recent public shooters killed people for having the audacity to be at a Planned Parenthood clinic. Another one praised Donald Trump during police interrogation. And, a third killed people in their own church for being black. They certainly don't smack of 'Dem!'

There's no factual basis for your suggestion that most mass murders are either sound-minded people driven by Democracy or mentally unsound Republicans (even if extremist media sources would like you to believe so).

People of all political affiliations, and no political affiliation, kill other people. Some of them are mentally ill and some of them are not. They all had guns; that's the definite commonality.

It would be nice to have a data base that had everyone that was a suspected terrorist on. The Orlando shooter was turned down at a gun shop for being weird. Personally I believe that in order to buy a gun a person should be an American citizen. Not a green card holder or a visa holder and that would include ambassadors and their families. That's probably already set but I'm not sure.
There is a guy that refuses to sell to any Islamic person and he's getting shit for it. I would support a no fly no buy bill without any pork but that's probably not going to happen either. Even a temporary ban for 3 years to see if it slows down anything would be good.
But those people doing the sit in should go to Chicago or Philadelphia and raise some hell about the shootings there. I would consider a town that has over 30 shootings in a weekend a mass shooting spree. And they have some tough gun laws.

(06-22-2016, 06:45 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

He's serious.

Sure I am, I wonder if they're sitting around in their bunny PJ's right now, maybe eating some smores that some underpaid congressional aide brings in.

Its crap like this that screws up the process and the laws already written.

A U.S. immigration official blamed in a federal report for barring law enforcement agents from a suspect in the San Bernardino terror attack has been nominated for a prestigious agency award – but her bosses in Washington refuse to say what she did to earn consideration. Irene Martin heads the San Bernardino U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office, where last December, she allegedly blocked five armed Department of Homeland Security agents from the man authorities say supplied the firepower in the deadly attack a day earlier. Although an Inspector General's report found she acted improperly, and then lied to investigators, FoxNews.com has learned she has been nominated for the Secretary’s Award for Valor. “To give Irene Martin an award for valor is insulting to all the prior awardees – the agents and officers who truly displayed valor and risked their lives to save someone else,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based research institute. ...

link

There's not enough information in that report for me to think Ms. Martin should not be given an award, Maggot.

There are no details available as to the reason for her actions, who directed her to take them, or the rationale for the valor award. It's speculative insinuation and bad journalism, in my opinion.

For all I know, she delayed HS officials from getting to Marquez on request of the FBI who felt they could get more out of Marquez (an American citizen) using tactics that wouldn't make him clam up. He's a weird jumpy guy with a history of mental illness, and they did end up getting a lot out of him quickly. Shortly thereafter, they had no problem enforcing the existing laws; they arrested him and deported his Eastern European wife.

We don't know the nature of the inter-agency turf war. If she's getting an award for obstruction of justice, yeah that's bullshit. But, we don't know if that's the case nor does the Fox News reporter.

^ Here's an article with the details and background about what happened with Martin at the San Bernadino Immigration Office.

http://www.sbsun.com/general-news/201606...ter-attack

It sounds like terrible communication and lack of policy understanding between the various Department of Homeland Security divisions in a first-time situation.

Martin obviously didn't know what she could and couldn't do, calling superiors who later gave the DHS LE agents the same answers they'd given Martin when she called asking for advice. It reminds me of the lack of communication between agencies on 9 / 11, which is very concerning.

The San Bernadino office separated immigration processing from the immigration LE branch and put them in separate buildings last year. I don't know if there was a 'turf war' or just confusion about the separation of divisions. But, if the LE agents told her why they were there, they should have been given quick access after verification of their credentials by the HCS FPS contracted security guards.

Regardless, it sounds like Martin did lie during the investigation when she claimed she'd never told LE what she'd been told by superiors before the Washington field office finally gave the green light to allow access.

I agree that Martin should not have been given a promotion during the course of the investigation into her actions and especially after the Inspector General found she'd lied. That is bullshit, Maggot. She didn't stop the laws from being enforced and she did not bar Feds from a terror suspect as the Fox headline claims; he was not in the immigration building at all that day. But, it shouldn't have taken so long for that to be known by the DHS LE agents.

(06-23-2016, 07:26 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-22-2016, 09:52 PM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]Sure I am

I've spent 8 yrs. with you. I recognize your serious tone when I read it.

Do you have any concerns that your majority is going to be lost come election time?

I'm really not nutso crazy about the election. I tend to think Trump will tone down his rhetoric and Hillary will continue to be Hillary. The Senate races are probably as important if not more important at this point. Guns may become a little more of an issue than terrorism or immigration and I think that all goes hand in hand.

Did you see they lost track of the Orlando shooters wife?