NRA Member Who Lost Sister To Gun Violence Tearfully Asks Senate To Protect Women

[Steven_R]

Do we extend that to every single thing someone who wants to put an ex-wife into the dirt could use? If I'm going to walk right through a restraining order and fuck up someone I can use stuff other than guns. Knives, baseball bats, hammers, my bare fists, shoes, books, glass pitchers, bricks, dot matrix printers, coffee pots, cases of jars of olives, casks of rum, Buicks, and good thick leather belts are all options for beating the shit out of people.

Do I get a background check every time I want to buy that stuff because you know, if it saves just one life...

 

[The Rabbi]

The highlights in this case:

1. There are no regulations on conducting background checks for online gun sales.

2. There are no regulations on unlicensed gun dealers.

3. There are no regulations on federal law-breakers preventing them from buying guns.

We need to regulate criminals more heavily. Maybe then, there would be less crime. I'm sure the Wrongpublicans of USMB will be outraged at the thought of more regulation, but guess what, Wrongpublicans? Next time, it won't be someone you view as less than humyn, like a minority or womyn. Next time, it'll be you instead. So when you whine about "hurr durr we don need no rules," remember that those rules are in place to protect everyone, including you.

1. Wrong.
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong

Prove it. Cite for me the exact laws that regulate unlicensed gun dealers and those in violation of federal laws. Also provide for us a link to the regulations that require private online gun sellers to conduct background checks, as well as a copy of the email you will undoubtedly be sending to the author of the OP's article, correcting hyr assertion--



--that there are no background check requirements for private online gun sales.

4. You cannot regulate criminals, by definition.

Ever heard of a prison, conservatard? Or a jail? Or law enforcement? All of those things are designed specifically to regulate crymynyls. Or is it your assertion that prisons are there to regulate law-abiding cytyzyns?

If you really cared about "wymyn" you would support fewer restrictions on their right to keep and bear arms. Guns save lives.

Wrong again. Guns end lives; doctors save them.

You know, doctors? The kind of pyyple that President Obama wants to make sure every American is able to see? The kind of pyyple that Wrongpublican lawmakers refuse to allow to serve the poor? Those doctors are the ones I'm referring to.

Youre so fucking stupid I am certain you are a plant. No one can be that dumb.
For starters:
Gun Control Act 922.a1(A) makes it a crime to engage in the business of dealing in firearms without a license. Dealing is defined previously in the act.
There is no unlicensed gun dealer (see above) An unlicensed gun dealer is operating illegally.
The same act defines categories of prohibited persons who are not allowed to own firearms. That was expanded by the Lautenberg Amendment m 1997.
Unless you think all criminals are in prison you are sadly mistaken in thinking that laws will stop them.
Doctors treat people. Guns prevent people from needing to see doctors. Guns are used to stop crime over a million times every year in this country, especially among women. (I dont know about wymyn. They can just go fuck themselves).
And Obamacare has made it more difficult for women to see doctors, limiting their network of doctor choices.
I am certain you are not a female, not lesbian, and not a liberal. You are in fact a mysogynist redneck in Michigan or somewhere. Only someone with a real hatred of women would demean them by mis spelling the term, by supporting measures like Obamacare that endanger women's health, and by opposing allowing women the means to defend themselves.

 

[The Rabbi]

Proof that enforcement of restraining orders saves lives.

How do you enforce a restraining order if there exists easy options for the abusive maniac to still get a gun or buy ammo?

If a restraining order meant your name instantly goes to every retailer in the area and privates sales must be check.... then the crazed husband has to risk going to the streets, dealing with a criminal element -- and the street price will be incredibly high as the black market dries up when private sellers are liable for selling to strangers.

You really think a guy intent on murder is going to worry about dealing with a criminal element?
You're pretty fucking stupid, guy.

 

[Peach]

Guns are a tool that help woman when police are 5 minutes away. So you want to see more dead woman?

Nope - I think anyone who can pass a background check has the right to own a gun.

So someone who had a conviction 30 years ago and has been clean ever since has no right to self defense? No I dont think so.

I agree, one man I know has a 24 year old felony marijuana conviction, Federal. Got all his civil rights restored except firearm rights, by the Governor. Takes a Presidential pardon to get his 2nd Amendment rights restored. Non violent felons after a certain period of time should not have to spend thousands, and wait decades, to hunt, and protect themselves. Yes, he bow hunts now, but must also go into the woods for his work in the timber business; he deserves protection, as does other citizens. He paid his debt to society 19 YEARS AGO.

 

[The Rabbi]

Nope - I think anyone who can pass a background check has the right to own a gun.

So someone who had a conviction 30 years ago and has been clean ever since has no right to self defense? No I dont think so.

I agree, one man I know has a 24 year old felony marijuana conviction, Federal. Got all his civil rights restored except firearm rights, by the Governor. Takes a Presidential pardon to get his 2nd Amendment rights restored. Non violent felons after a certain period of time should not have to spend thousands, and wait decades, to hunt, and protect themselves. Yes, he bow hunts now, but must also go into the woods for his work in the timber business; he deserves protection, as does other citizens. He paid his debt to society 19 YEARS AGO.

The whole thing is absurd. I have been a dealer for nearly 10 years. I saw people with guns every day. Some of them were prohibited. There wasn't a damn thing the law did to prevent them from getting guns. Nothing. It's a farce.

 

[Stephanie]

yeah and all the pro-life people have been tearfully pleading with you and your party to step in and stop the killing of so many babies with abortions

we see how that went didn't we

how low can you go using people deaths for your political agendas

it's a sickness with you all

 

[Wildman]

After her ex slashed her tires and physically threatened her, Zina had obtained a restraining order against him, which should have prohibited him under federal law from buying a gun. But he was able to purchase a gun online, where private sellers are not required to conduct background checks.

"He posted an ad saying, 'Serious buyer looking to buy a gun ASAP,'" Elvin said. "Within an hour, he found an unlicensed seller, and they met at a McDonald's parking lot."

The highlights in this case:

1. There are no regulations on conducting background checks for online gun sales.

2. There are no regulations on unlicensed gun dealers.

3. There are no regulations on federal law-breakers preventing them from buying guns.

We need to regulate criminals more heavily. Maybe then, there would be less crime. I'm sure the Wrongpublicans of USMB will be outraged at the thought of more regulation, but guess what, Wrongpublicans? Next time, it won't be someone you view as less than humyn, like a minority or womyn. Next time, it'll be you instead. So when you whine about "hurr durr we don need no rules," remember that those rules are in place to protect everyone, including you.

1. There are no regulations on conducting background checks for online gun sales.

now i know for certain you are an uninformed stupid fucking libercunt !!

let's say Rabbi wants to sell a gun over the Inet, i buy it, he takes it to a FFL to ship to my FFl, my FFL runs a BGC on me, if i am clean, i fill out the form (BTW do you know what form i speak of ?) pay him a transfer fee, i walk away with gun in hand......, any fucking questions ?


BTW

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nope - I think anyone who can pass a background check has the right to own a gun.

This isn't about safety, or background checks.

What the gun grabbers what is a list of all gun owners and the guns they own.

If you can't buy and sell privately, the government has a record of every serial number and owner of every firearm.

For ease of confiscation.

This story is about how a guy who was under an order of protection was able to get a gun off the internet within an hour, so he could go shoot his wife with it.

Requiring background checks for all gun purchases is a simple easy fix.

No. Its not.
The only way it can be enforced is universal registration.

See, the state has to prove that you did not undergo a background check when you bought a gun from some guy you met in the internet....

 

[nodoginnafight]

This isn't about safety, or background checks.

What the gun grabbers what is a list of all gun owners and the guns they own.

If you can't buy and sell privately, the government has a record of every serial number and owner of every firearm.

For ease of confiscation.

This story is about how a guy who was under an order of protection was able to get a gun off the internet within an hour, so he could go shoot his wife with it.

Requiring background checks for all gun purchases is a simple easy fix.

No. Its not.
The only way it can be enforced is universal registration.

See, the state has to prove that you did not undergo a background check when you bought a gun from some guy you met in the internet....

and ..... ?????

Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

 

[The Rabbi]

This story is about how a guy who was under an order of protection was able to get a gun off the internet within an hour, so he could go shoot his wife with it.

Requiring background checks for all gun purchases is a simple easy fix.

No. Its not.
The only way it can be enforced is universal registration.

See, the state has to prove that you did not undergo a background check when you bought a gun from some guy you met in the internet....

and ..... ?????

Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

Yes, if your intent is to disarm the law abiding population.
It always leads to confiscation. Look what happened in NY.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Proof that enforcement of restraining orders saves lives.

How do you enforce a restraining order if there exists easy options for the abusive maniac to still get a gun or buy ammo?

The exact same way you enforce it if there exists an easy way for him to get a baseball bat.

If a restraining order meant your name instantly goes to every retailer in the area...

Nope. It goes into a state database that the NICS uses when the sale is called in.

and privates sales must be check.

Which is impossible impossible to enforce...

then the crazed husband has to risk going to the streets, dealing with a criminal element

Because, as you know, crazed abusive maniacs bent on harming/killing their SO have ethical objections to things like that.

and the street price will be incredibly high....

As if you know.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This story is about how a guy who was under an order of protection was able to get a gun off the internet within an hour, so he could go shoot his wife with it.

Requiring background checks for all gun purchases is a simple easy fix.

No. Its not.
The only way it can be enforced is universal registration.

See, the state has to prove that you did not undergo a background check when you bought a gun from some guy you met in the internet....

and ..... ?????
Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

WASHINGTON -- Elvin Daniel, 56, is a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association, an avid hunter and a self-described "constitutional conservative" from a small town in Illinois. He became an unlikely witness for the Democrats on Wednesday at the first-ever Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence against women.

Daniel choked back tears at the hearing as he recounted the story of his sister, Zina, who was shot and killed by her estranged ex-husband in 2012. After her ex slashed her tires and physically threatened her, Zina had obtained a restraining order against him, which should have prohibited him under federal law from buying a gun. But he was able to purchase a gun online, where private sellers are not required to conduct background checks.

"He posted an ad saying, 'Serious buyer looking to buy a gun ASAP,'" Elvin said. "Within an hour, he found an unlicensed seller, and they met at a McDonald's parking lot."

Zina's husband then murdered her and injured four other people before shooting himself.

"Now I'm helping to care for my two nieces who lost their mother and who will have to grow up without her," Daniel told the committee. "I'm here today for Zina and for the stories like Zina's that happen every day because of the serious gap in our gun laws that continue to put women's lives in danger."

American women account for 84 percent of all female gun victims in the developed world, and more than a quarter of female homicide victims in the U.S. are killed by an intimate partner.

The two bills being considered in the Senate, introduced by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), would strengthen federal gun prohibitions for convicted domestic abusers and those deemed by a judge to be a physical threat to a woman. Klobuchar's bill would include physically abusive dating partners and convicted stalkers in the category of persons who are prohibited from buying or possessing a gun. Blumenthal's bill would ban guns for those who have been issued a temporary restraining order by a judge for domestic violence.

"If we can save just one life, that would be worth everything we're going through," he said. "And I know we can save more than one life."

More: NRA Member Who Lost Sister To Gun Violence Tearfully Asks Senate To Protect Women

More proof that universal background checks can save lives.

NRA Member Who Lost Sister To Gun Violence Tearfully Asks Senate To Protect Women

I missed the part where she asked them to expedite gun purchases and firearm training for women threatened by scumbags like her ex.

 

[nodoginnafight]

No. Its not.
The only way it can be enforced is universal registration.

See, the state has to prove that you did not undergo a background check when you bought a gun from some guy you met in the internet....

and ..... ?????
Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

So we enforce them.
if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws - which would also be a good thing.

 

[The Rabbi]

and ..... ?????
Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

So we enforce them.
if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws - which would also be a good thing.

What part of the word "unenforceable" is unclear to you?

 

[M14 Shooter]

and ..... ?????
Universal background checks - it's the smart thing to do.

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

So we enforce them.

How does the state prove that a gun was bought w/o a background check?

if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws

BS. Nothing that this amendment made it more difficult to enforce background checks or any other gun-related law.

 

[Steven_R]

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

So we enforce them.
if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws - which would also be a good thing.

What part of the word "unenforceable" is unclear to you?

But pushing do-nothing, feel-good legislation is always an option in an election year. If our betters don't at least look like they're doing something to think of the children, they might lose their phony baloney jobs, and we can't have that.

 

[hadit]

I don't own a gun and don't want to. I also don't want a potential assailant to know that.

[MENTION=44342]hadit[/MENTION]

Well, someone's going to ask, may as well be me, old buddy:





Then what's that in your pocket?

Her eyes got big and she gasped "that thing's huge" when I whipped out my brand new Samsung Galaxy S3.

True story. Happened at work. "She" was my boss at the time.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Unenforcable laws are never a smart thing to do.

So we enforce them.

How does the state prove that a gun was bought w/o a background check?

if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws

BS. Nothing that this amendment made it more difficult to enforce background checks or any other gun-related law.

I see you've never heard of the Tiahardt Amendments.

 

[nodoginnafight]

So we enforce them.
if the NRA hadn't pushed through the Tiahardt Amendments, it would be possible to enforce our existing laws - which would also be a good thing.

What part of the word "unenforceable" is unclear to you?

But pushing do-nothing, feel-good legislation is always an option in an election year. If our betters don't at least look like they're doing something to think of the children, they might lose their phony baloney jobs, and we can't have that.

If it's "do-nothing" legislation, how come the NRA is spending so much of your money fighting it?