Colege Kids Sign Petition to Have Gun Owners Executed in FEMA Camps

[Toro]

i would have totally signed this petition. with my "lets be real name": george w. hitler.

I would have signed it "JimBowie1958, www.usmessageboard.com"

 

[Ringel05]

I know you fancy yourself a hilarious Bill Maher wannabe, but it just ain't happening. I believe you really would gladly sign such a petition. Because you are a hateful Communist Globalist. You do wish death and imprisonment on those who hold different political views. You're not well Comrade. Get some help.

You can't argue with College kids or petitions

Enough people sign....you go

Seriously Comrade, get some help. You've lost it.

Clueless!! Absolutely clueless!!!!!!

 

[Spoonman]

Yeah, one deranged Communist here finally admitted he or she would gladly sign the petition. Others are hiding behind sarcastic ridicule. Don't let em fool ya though, some have no problem with imprisoning or even executing those who hold differing political views. It's very disturbing. So, many will choose to laugh at this, but it's really not funny. These cretins do vote. And the Communists they vote for are definitely not joking about disarming Citizens.

what these gun grabbing lunatics have to realize is gun owners are growing. and growing at a rapid rate. even in this we are coming for your guns environment 47% of households still admit to having a gun. 20,000,000 new permits a year. people who never had guns before are getting them the more the anti crowd pushes, the larger the pro gun crowd grows. the stronger gun lobbyists grow. these self defeating idiots should be more concerned about the people they are trying to trample now and how they will react in kind to them in the future. they are a shrining minority

Yeah it was very sad observing a hateful Communist here admitting he or she would gladly sign such a petition. Death and imprisonment for merely holding differing political views? Man, that's just lunacy. But yeah, it's your Constitutional right to protect yourself and your family by way of arms. And the number of Citizens doing that is growing rapidly. Things are not getting better. They're getting worse. Protecting yourself and your Family is a solemn responsibility. It shouldn't be taken lightly.

Mass civil unrest upheaval is not just a paranoid delusion. It's actually a very real possibility. We're much closer to the abyss than most would like to acknowledge. Too many are far too dependent on technology and Government. It really won't take much to send us over the edge. Disease and Natural Disasters will likely be the triggers for upheaval. I mean, how many people are really prepared for even minor disasters? Not many. So being prepared for such unrest is very wise. And it's not just about arming yourself. Being prepared encompasses a wide variety of options. I know most will continue to call it 'silly paranoia', but i don't think it is. I think it's just good common sense.

to many are way to dependent on the system to survive, and what happens when there is a glitch in the system. Even a temporary one like an interruption from a hurricane or winter storm. gas lines, empty shelves at the market. and these are regional disturbances. but what happens when we have a major national disruption. our systems are hacked, logistics are shut down. how long will it take for these dependent people to start turning on each other?

 

[rightwinger]

I don't know

College kids are pretty smart

If they think gun owners should go to death camps, maybe we should listen

 

[Spoonman]

I don't know

College kids are pretty smart

If they think gun owners should go to death camps, maybe we should listen

if college kids are so smart why can't they get job when they get out of school?



Oh yea, the obamaeconomy

 

[Toro]

I don't know

College kids are pretty smart

If they think gun owners should go to death camps, maybe we should listen

You spelled "colege" wrong, libtard.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The stunt was good for some laughs, but it really seemed more an indictment on the credibility of petitions than anything else.

It's a pretty safe bet that most of those kids were just out to placate some pushy stranger in the least confrontational way possible, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a couple used phony signatures to do it.

The reaction of the guy pushing green initiatives with summer jobs sort of blows the premise of the parody out of the water. Not all of us 'liberals' are out to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

No ‘liberal’ is out to ‘abolish’ the Second Amendment.

 

[Spoonman]

The stunt was good for some laughs, but it really seemed more an indictment on the credibility of petitions than anything else.

It's a pretty safe bet that most of those kids were just out to placate some pushy stranger in the least confrontational way possible, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a couple used phony signatures to do it.

The reaction of the guy pushing green initiatives with summer jobs sort of blows the premise of the parody out of the water. Not all of us 'liberals' are out to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

No ‘liberal’ is out to ‘abolish’ the Second Amendment.

they sure as hell are out to infringe it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I know a lot of people like to laugh this stuff off, but is it really so funny? It's not a joke. The Communist Globalists are serious about disarming Citizens. And these people vote for them. Always keep that in mind.

Actually it is.

And you’re a joke as well, if you truly believe civil rights can be restricted solely as a consequence of a ‘petition.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The stunt was good for some laughs, but it really seemed more an indictment on the credibility of petitions than anything else.

It's a pretty safe bet that most of those kids were just out to placate some pushy stranger in the least confrontational way possible, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a couple used phony signatures to do it.

The reaction of the guy pushing green initiatives with summer jobs sort of blows the premise of the parody out of the water. Not all of us 'liberals' are out to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

it crack me up when I see these gun owners say stupid shit like this ... so the ole sarcastic button gets pushed ... I can't believe that these gun owners are so ignorant to believe that we Liberals want to do this kind of shit ... it's beyond me ... but every day they show us their ignorance about what we are about, so sarcastic button here comes out ...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

Nonsense.

Background checks are Constitutional, effective, and in no way ‘lead’ to ‘registration.’

If you’re worried about registration, make sure it doesn’t happen in your state; or if your state has registration, advocate to have the laws repealed.

But either way, ‘confiscation’ of firearms is both un-Constitutional and logistically impossible.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

it crack me up when I see these gun owners say stupid shit like this ... so the ole sarcastic button gets pushed ... I can't believe that these gun owners are so ignorant to believe that we Liberals want to do this kind of shit ... it's beyond me ... but every day they show us their ignorance about what we are about, so sarcastic button here comes out ...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

There's probably some truth in that equation.

New legislation in the wake of the recent rash of shootings allegedly carried out by mentally disturbed perpetrators (Loughner, Holmes, Lanza, Alexis...) will likely continue to be constructed retroactively as a main avenue for confiscating the firearms of many currently legal gun-owners (most notably former soldiers), no matter how long they've lived peacefully as law-abiding citizens following their respective diagnoses/initiations of treatment plans.

The question is: how many of those people probably should be disarmed?

That's a tough one.

Incorrect.

Private property, including firearms, can’t be confiscated absent due process and just compensation. In order to be disallowed the right to possess a firearm, one must be determined mentally incompetent by a neutral magistrate, pursuant to objective evidence in support. Absent such a determination, one’s firearms can not be ‘confiscated.’

Even if the confiscation of firearms by the state isn’t subject to Takings Clause jurisprudence, each of the 300,000,000 takings would still need to be adjudicated, which could literally take centuries.

And that doesn’t even take into consideration the impossible task of obtaining warrants to search the dwellings of some 300,000,000 gun owners.

Consequently, the ‘FEMA camp’ myth as contrived by the right remains indeed a myth, as is the ignorant, paranoid notion of ‘gun confiscation.’

 

[Spoonman]

it crack me up when I see these gun owners say stupid shit like this ... so the ole sarcastic button gets pushed ... I can't believe that these gun owners are so ignorant to believe that we Liberals want to do this kind of shit ... it's beyond me ... but every day they show us their ignorance about what we are about, so sarcastic button here comes out ...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

Nonsense.

Background checks are Constitutional, effective, and in no way ‘lead’ to ‘registration.’

If you’re worried about registration, make sure it doesn’t happen in your state; or if your state has registration, advocate to have the laws repealed.

But either way, ‘confiscation’ of firearms is both un-Constitutional and logistically impossible.

show me the line in the constitution that says background checks are constitutional.

 

[rightwinger]

The stunt was good for some laughs, but it really seemed more an indictment on the credibility of petitions than anything else.

It's a pretty safe bet that most of those kids were just out to placate some pushy stranger in the least confrontational way possible, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a couple used phony signatures to do it.

The reaction of the guy pushing green initiatives with summer jobs sort of blows the premise of the parody out of the water. Not all of us 'liberals' are out to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

No ‘liberal’ is out to ‘abolish’ the Second Amendment.

It's worth a shot

gun owners would fit right in at concentration camps

 

[L.K.Eder]

The stunt was good for some laughs, but it really seemed more an indictment on the credibility of petitions than anything else.

It's a pretty safe bet that most of those kids were just out to placate some pushy stranger in the least confrontational way possible, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a couple used phony signatures to do it.

The reaction of the guy pushing green initiatives with summer jobs sort of blows the premise of the parody out of the water. Not all of us 'liberals' are out to abolish the 2nd Amendment.

No ‘liberal’ is out to ‘abolish’ the Second Amendment.

they sure as hell are out to infringe it.

i can't handle all the realness you are dealing out here.

 

[Capstone]

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

There's probably some truth in that equation.

New legislation in the wake of the recent rash of shootings allegedly carried out by mentally disturbed perpetrators (Loughner, Holmes, Lanza, Alexis...) will likely continue to be constructed retroactively as a main avenue for confiscating the firearms of many currently legal gun-owners (most notably former soldiers), no matter how long they've lived peacefully as law-abiding citizens following their respective diagnoses/initiations of treatment plans.

The question is: how many of those people probably should be disarmed?

That's a tough one.

Incorrect.

Private property, including firearms, can’t be confiscated absent due process and just compensation. In order to be disallowed the right to possess a firearm, one must be determined mentally incompetent by a neutral magistrate, pursuant to objective evidence in support. Absent such a determination, one’s firearms can not be ‘confiscated.’

Even if the confiscation of firearms by the state isn’t subject to Takings Clause jurisprudence, each of the 300,000,000 takings would still need to be adjudicated, which could literally take centuries.

And that doesn’t even take into consideration the impossible task of obtaining warrants to search the dwellings of some 300,000,000 gun owners.

Consequently, the ‘FEMA camp’ myth as contrived by the right remains indeed a myth, as is the ignorant, paranoid notion of ‘gun confiscation.’

You might have a point there, if we were talking about 300 million Americans, ...but we're not. Some of the efforts in the aftermath of the incidents mentioned in my previous post have been intensely goal-focused, specifically to broaden the scope of background checks, disambiguate and expand existing determinants for the revocation of gun rights on the basis of mental health concerns, and to remove so-called "barriers" (by way of circumventing privacy rights).

As always, California and New York are leading the way to this brave new world.

And the powers that be at the federal level have been doing their part as well.

Today, the Administration is announcing two new executive actions that will help strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of the wrong hands. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a regulation to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons related to mental health, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a proposed regulation to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information on those persons to the federal background check system.

Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence. While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide.

The Administration takes a comprehensive approach to mental health issues by expanding coverage of mental health services so care is affordable, launching a national conversation on mental health to reduce stigma associated with having a mental illness and getting help, directing funds we have now to improve mental health facilities, and proposing more funds be used for efforts such as training additional mental health professionals.

At the same time, the Administration is committed to making sure that anyone who may pose a danger to themselves or others does not have access to a gun. The federal background check system is the most effective way to assure that such individuals are not able to purchase a firearm from a licensed gun dealer. To date, background checks have prevented over two million guns from falling into the wrong hands.

The Administration’s two new executive actions will help ensure that better and more reliable information makes its way into the background check system. The Administration also continues to call on Congress to pass common-sense gun safety legislation and to expand funding to increase access to mental health services.

Progress to Strengthen the Federal Background Check System

Over the past year, the Administration has taken several steps to strengthen the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which is used to run background checks on those who buy guns from federally licensed gun dealers to make sure they are not prohibited by law from owning a firearm. For example:

The President directed federal agencies to make all relevant records, including criminal history records and information related to persons prohibited from having guns for mental health reasons, available to the federal background check system. This effort is beginning to bear fruit. In the first nine months after the President’s directive, federal agencies have made available to the NICS over 1.2 million additional records identifying persons prohibited from possessing firearms, nearly a 23% increase from the number of records federal agencies had made available by the end of January.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives published a letter to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

States are one of the key sources of data on persons prohibited from having guns, including felons and those prohibited for mental health reasons. That’s why the President took action to invest an additional $20 million this year to improve incentives for states to share this information with the federal background check system. In September 2013, DOJ awarded $27.5 million to 42 states and one territory to strengthen the firearms background check system by improving their abilities to share information with the NICS. In addition, the Administration is proposing $50 million for this purpose in FY2014, and Congress should act to provide these critical resources.

Two New Actions to Further Strengthen the Federal Background Check System

Some states have reported that certain barriers under current law make it difficult for them to identify and submit appropriate information to the federal background check system regarding individuals prohibited under federal law from having a gun for mental health reasons. Today, DOJ and HHS are taking steps that will help address these barriers.

Some states have noted that the terminology used by federal law to prohibit people from purchasing a firearm for certain mental health reasons is ambiguous. Today, DOJ is issuing a proposed rule to make several clarifications. For example, DOJ is proposing to clarify that the statutory term “committed to a mental institution” includes involuntary inpatient as well as outpatient commitments. In addition to providing general guidance on federal law, these clarifications will help states determine what information should be made accessible to the federal background check system, which will, in turn, strengthen the system’s reliability and effectiveness.

Some states have also said that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s (HIPAA) privacy provisions may be preventing them from making relevant information available to the background check system regarding individuals prohibited from purchasing a firearm for mental health reasons. In April 2013, HHS began to identify the scope and extent of the problem, and based on public comments is now issuing a proposed rule to eliminate this barrier by giving certain HIPAA covered entities an express permission to submit to the background check system the limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands. The proposed rule will not change the fact that seeking help for mental health problems or getting treatment does not make someone legally prohibited from having a firearm. Furthermore, nothing in the proposed rule would require reporting on general mental health visits or other routine mental health care, or would exempt providers solely performing these treatment services from existing privacy rules.

Calling on Congress to Act

While the President and the Vice President continue to do everything they can to reduce gun violence, Congress must also act. Passing common-sense gun safety legislation – including expanding background checks and making gun trafficking a federal crime – remains the most important step we can take to reduce gun violence. The vast majority of Americans support these critical measures, which would protect our children and our communities without infringing on anyone’s Second Amendment rights.

In addition, the President’s FY 2014 Budget proposes a new $130 million initiative to address several barriers that may prevent people – especially youth and young adults – from getting help for mental health problems. The President and the Vice President continue to call on Congress to appropriate funds for these important purposes. [emphasis Capstone's]

How many more Americans will be effected by the simple inclusion of "out-patient commitment(s)" is unclear, but it's bound to substantially increase the revocation pool.

Again, in my opinion, the question as to how many of the effected people actually should have their gun rights revoked ...is a tough one; but it seems pretty safe to assume that at least some number of individuals will be unjustly disarmed as a result of these new provisions.

 

[Geaux4it]

it crack me up when I see these gun owners say stupid shit like this ... so the ole sarcastic button gets pushed ... I can't believe that these gun owners are so ignorant to believe that we Liberals want to do this kind of shit ... it's beyond me ... but every day they show us their ignorance about what we are about, so sarcastic button here comes out ...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

Nonsense.

Background checks are Constitutional, effective, and in no way ‘lead’ to ‘registration.’

If you’re worried about registration, make sure it doesn’t happen in your state; or if your state has registration, advocate to have the laws repealed.

But either way, ‘confiscation’ of firearms is both un-Constitutional and logistically impossible.

I couldn't disagree more. Throughout history the results are unarguable...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

 

[JimBowie1958]

i would have totally signed this petition. with my "lets be real name": george w. hitler.

I would have signed it "JimBowie1958, www.usmessageboard.com"

Lol, and the real Jim Bowie would cut your heart out like he did some of those guys who attacked him on the Sand Bart fight if he ever caught you doing that.

Of course men like him are dead and gone, as is the age where a man's word was his currency and his honor more precious than life itself.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I don't know

College kids are pretty smart

If they think gun owners should go to death camps, maybe we should listen

don't you have somewhere else to troll, like on foot in the middle of an interstate highway or toxic swamp?

lol

 

[JimBowie1958]

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

Nonsense.

Background checks are Constitutional, effective, and in no way ‘lead’ to ‘registration.’

If you’re worried about registration, make sure it doesn’t happen in your state; or if your state has registration, advocate to have the laws repealed.

But either way, ‘confiscation’ of firearms is both un-Constitutional and logistically impossible.

I couldn't disagree more. Throughout history the results are unarguable...

background checks=registration=confiscation

-Geaux

Registration does not necessarily follow back ground checks, but they do tend to since it is so easy to start registration by not destroying the background check records.

Under current law these background check records are supposed to be destroyed. Do you have any evidence of the ATF or any other government agency (federal or state) not destroying the records?

 

[rightwinger]

I don't know

College kids are pretty smart

If they think gun owners should go to death camps, maybe we should listen

don't you have somewhere else to troll, like on foot in the middle of an interstate highway or toxic swamp?

lol

Sorry

Didn't realize how serious you are about these "Colege" kids