GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, OR DO THEY?

[Maggot]

Slippery.

[Duchess]

She is too stupid to live.

[F.U.]

Just looked at the specs on that escort. That little pistol is almost 5 inches long and 4 inches tall. http://jtjersey.com/Escort/smith.htm

[Maggot]

Maybe just the barrel was in its "holster"

[Jimbone]

Or maybe she has an enormous vagina.

[Duchess]

Eww. "My snapper is large enough to accommodate a loaded weapon". Yuk!

[F.U.]

4x5, what is that about the size of a pack of cigs? Smokers?

[Maggot]

4x5, what is that about the size of a pack of cigs? Smokers?

Or a fist. Did I just say that?

[Duchess]

Or a fist. Did I just say that?

Oh My God! I had no idea you would ever have a thought like that.

[Jimbone]

Really? That's the least of maggots thoughts I'm guessing.

[HairOfTheDog]

Hillary Clinton -- Gun Control Legislation Platform



Clinton is in New Hampshire today, where she trails Bernie Sanders. She will roll out her plan for gun control reform, which includes:

1. Closing background check loopholes for gun show, private, and online purchases/transactions.

2. Barring all domestic abusers and stalkers from buying and possessing guns.

3. Repealing a law that prevents victims from suing gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers (this is significant and sets Clinton apart from Sanders).

4. Extending the wait time for guns if a background check can't be completed with the current 3 day wait period.
(Dylann Roof, the Charleston church shooter, legally purchased his gun -- despite a disqualifying arrest -- because his background check wasn't completed within the 3 day period allotted to the Fed. He then killed 9 people with that gun).

Clinton says that, if elected President, she would like to work with Congress to push through new gun control legislation. However, if Congress refuses, she'll use Executive Action to enact new gun laws.

Refs:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/...expanding/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hill...85030c6b3b

[F.U.]

Hillary Clinton -- Proposed Gun Control Legislation



Clinton is in New Hampshire today, where she trails Bernie Sanders. She will roll out her plan for gun control reform, which includes:

1. Closing background check loopholes for gun show, private, and online purchases/transactions.

2. Barring all domestic abusers and stalkers from buying and possessing guns.

3. Repealing a law that prevents victims from suing gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers (this is significant and sets Clinton apart from Sanders).

4. Extending the wait time for guns if a background check can't be completed with the current 3 day wait period.
(Dylann Roof, the Charleston church shooter, legally purchased his gun -- despite a disqualifying arrest -- because his background check wasn't completed within the 3 day period allotted to the Fed. He then killed 9 people with that gun).

Clinton says that, if elected President, she would like to work with Congress to push through new gun control legislation. However, if Congress refuses, she'll use to enact new gun laws.

Refs:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/...expanding/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hill...85030c6b3b

1, sure, ok.
2, I would like to hear more before saying yes or no.
3, No its not the manufacture or dealers fault. Its the trigger nuts fault.
4, Sure, I've questioned the three day rule all along.

Executive Action comment. Fuck her and her Executive Action bull shit.

[HairOfTheDog]

I think Clinton's proposal is a good one, with the exception of point 3.

Here's some information on the law that she will push to have repealed if she's elected President.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed by the U.S. Senate on July 29, 2005, by a vote of 65-31. On October 20, 2005, it was passed by the House of Representatives 283 in favor and 144 opposed. It was signed into law on October 26, 2005, by President George W. Bush and became Public Law 109-92. The National Rifle Association thanked President Bush for signing the Act, for which it had lobbied, describing it as, "...the most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in twenty years into law."

In the years before passage of the act, victims of firearms violence in the United States had successfully sued manufacturers and dealers for negligence on the grounds that they should have foreseen that their products would be diverted to criminal use.

The purpose of the act is to prevent firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for negligence when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products (i.e. automobiles, appliances, power tools, etc.) are held responsible.

I don't think manufacturers and dealers should be held liable for people who break the law using their products, unless those manufacturers and dealers broke laws themselves in the process of putting their products into the wrong hands.

I don't support Clinton's plan to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

[Maggot]

She could just push 3 through and simply destroy the gun marketplace over time. L.A. just lost their last dealership because of retaliatory city and state regulations. Some will say its not related but it is an example of how to proceed without up front legislation.
I could see a 10 day waiting period.

[Blindgreed1]

Wasn't there something else in there too about manufacturers using the latest technology? I think there was and I wondered to myself how the govt. would monitor that.

[Duchess]

I don't support Clinton's plan to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

I don't either, that's bullshit. You can't hold a manufacturer responsible. It's not like it's a faulty car for christssake.

[F.U.]

The reason I want to hear more about #2 before I say yes or no is because I want to know their definition of a abuser is. Is that label placed on anyone that has ever ben accused of a domestic or do they have to be convicted?

[F.U.]

She could just push 3 through and simply destroy the gun marketplace over time. L.A. just lost their last dealership because of retaliatory city and state regulations. Some will say its not related but it is an example of how to proceed without up front legislation.
I could see a 10 day waiting period.

I don't think there should be a waiting period at all for people that hold a FFL, Permit to purchase, or a permit to carry. First time buyers, yes, but what is being accomplished by delaying a person that already owns firearms?

[Maggot]

She could just push 3 through and simply destroy the gun marketplace over time. L.A. just lost their last dealership because of retaliatory city and state regulations. Some will say its not related but it is an example of how to proceed without up front legislation.
I could see a 10 day waiting period.

I don't think there should be a waiting period at all for people that hold a FFL, Permit to purchase, or a permit to carry. First time buyers, yes, but what is being accomplished by delaying a person that already owns firearms?

If they already have that they should be able to get it the same day. I'm talking about first time buyers. These politicians never think of any details when their knees start doing the flippin kibby.

[F.U.]

She could just push 3 through and simply destroy the gun marketplace over time. L.A. just lost their last dealership because of retaliatory city and state regulations. Some will say its not related but it is an example of how to proceed without up front legislation.
I could see a 10 day waiting period.

I don't think there should be a waiting period at all for people that hold a FFL, Permit to purchase, or a permit to carry. First time buyers, yes, but what is being accomplished by delaying a person that already owns firearms?

If they already have that they should be able to get it the same day. I'm talking about first time buyers. These politicians never think of any details when their knees start doing the flippin kibby.

That's the problem. If they wrote a law like this the would forget all about those people mentioned and just blanket everyone with a new law.