Democrat Platform destroys the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

[bigrebnc1775]

Only through licensed dealers....the system we currently have....and only if we can get the same data base the cops use and make background check instant. No reason that with the tech we have that we can't do that.

Felons should be restricted and we can discuss for how long after they are off of parole...

With my plan, however, violent gun criminals would be serving 30 years for any crime.... real crime.....committed with a gun.....and attempted murder or murder with a gun would be life...but preferably the death penalty...

So...... embezzle money and become a felon...lose your right to own a gun till your time is served....use a gun for rape, robbery or murder.......you go away minimum 30 years....no parole.

So, you agree with Slade3200 that reasonable restrictions and infringements are OK. Your only disagreement with him and O'Rourke are what infringements are reasonable.

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

Booooo, you’re backing off you earlier argument that felons should not be able to buy guns. That’s weak, I was looking for a good debate

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....

Mass shooters


1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....

What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Why shouldn’t gang members be allowed to walk around with a gun in their pants? Isn’t that their right? And to be clear you are supporting banning violent felons from owning guns right?

Yep......violent felons...no guns.

Violent felons shouldn't be walking the streets

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Only through licensed dealers....the system we currently have....and only if we can get the same data base the cops use and make background check instant. No reason that with the tech we have that we can't do that.

Felons should be restricted and we can discuss for how long after they are off of parole...

With my plan, however, violent gun criminals would be serving 30 years for any crime.... real crime.....committed with a gun.....and attempted murder or murder with a gun would be life...but preferably the death penalty...

So...... embezzle money and become a felon...lose your right to own a gun till your time is served....use a gun for rape, robbery or murder.......you go away minimum 30 years....no parole.

So, you agree with Slade3200 that reasonable restrictions and infringements are OK. Your only disagreement with him and O'Rourke are what infringements are reasonable.

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

Booooo, you’re backing off you earlier argument that felons should not be able to buy guns. That’s weak, I was looking for a good debate

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....

Mass shooters


1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....

What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Why shouldn’t gang members be allowed to walk around with a gun in their pants? Isn’t that their right? And to be clear you are supporting banning violent felons from owning guns right?

Under my plan they would be in jail.....so it becomes a non issue. If democrats let them out they should not be able to own or carry a gun.....and should be arrested and jailed if they do....

Thanks for clearing that up. Where does the constitution allow for released felons to be stripped of their rights to bare arms? Wouldn’t that be infringement?

5th Amendment​

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ​

In other words, you can be deprived of your rights with due process of law.

Kudos! You actually made a substantive non trolling argument... well done! Keep it up

So that's all you have to say?

 

[daveman]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

He's a one hit blunder "I'm not a democrat but I support them"

 

[daveman]

I'm not smoking anything. Maybe I should so I can understand your post.

Oh really? You mean there ain't no smoking gun with your fingerprints on it?

You're telling me a cop is taking your fingerprints at a gun sale to register your "lawfully" purchased Firearms for any other reason than to put you in prison? No. They hold even a legal gun purchase against you like a felony on your record the rest of your life.

I live in Kentucky, a rational state. No fingerprints required for a firearms purchase. Minimum age 18 for a handgun, no minimum age for shotguns or rifles.

This will make Slade3200 freak out.

 

[daveman]

Only through licensed dealers....the system we currently have....and only if we can get the same data base the cops use and make background check instant. No reason that with the tech we have that we can't do that.

Felons should be restricted and we can discuss for how long after they are off of parole...

With my plan, however, violent gun criminals would be serving 30 years for any crime.... real crime.....committed with a gun.....and attempted murder or murder with a gun would be life...but preferably the death penalty...

So...... embezzle money and become a felon...lose your right to own a gun till your time is served....use a gun for rape, robbery or murder.......you go away minimum 30 years....no parole.

So, you agree with Slade3200 that reasonable restrictions and infringements are OK. Your only disagreement with him and O'Rourke are what infringements are reasonable.

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

Booooo, you’re backing off you earlier argument that felons should not be able to buy guns. That’s weak, I was looking for a good debate

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....

Mass shooters


1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....

What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Why shouldn’t gang members be allowed to walk around with a gun in their pants? Isn’t that their right? And to be clear you are supporting banning violent felons from owning guns right?

Yep......violent felons...no guns.

Violent felons shouldn't be walking the streets

Democrats purposefully assure they do.

 

[Slade3200]

Only through licensed dealers....the system we currently have....and only if we can get the same data base the cops use and make background check instant. No reason that with the tech we have that we can't do that.

Felons should be restricted and we can discuss for how long after they are off of parole...

With my plan, however, violent gun criminals would be serving 30 years for any crime.... real crime.....committed with a gun.....and attempted murder or murder with a gun would be life...but preferably the death penalty...

So...... embezzle money and become a felon...lose your right to own a gun till your time is served....use a gun for rape, robbery or murder.......you go away minimum 30 years....no parole.

So, you agree with Slade3200 that reasonable restrictions and infringements are OK. Your only disagreement with him and O'Rourke are what infringements are reasonable.

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

Booooo, you’re backing off you earlier argument that felons should not be able to buy guns. That’s weak, I was looking for a good debate

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....

Mass shooters


1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....

What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Why shouldn’t gang members be allowed to walk around with a gun in their pants? Isn’t that their right? And to be clear you are supporting banning violent felons from owning guns right?

Under my plan they would be in jail.....so it becomes a non issue. If democrats let them out they should not be able to own or carry a gun.....and should be arrested and jailed if they do....

Thanks for clearing that up. Where does the constitution allow for released felons to be stripped of their rights to bare arms? Wouldn’t that be infringement?

5th Amendment​

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ​

In other words, you can be deprived of your rights with due process of law.

Kudos! You actually made a substantive non trolling argument... well done! Keep it up

So that's all you have to say?

Yeah, it was a good argument. What else do you want me to say?

 

[Slade3200]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

Frankly I have no clue what talking points Dems use. This was the first time I’ve seen that memo and I gave my thoughts about it after I read it. Where was I wrong?

 

[Slade3200]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

He's a one hit blunder "I'm not a democrat but I support them"

Sometimes I do sometimes I dont

 

[daveman]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

Frankly I have no clue what talking points Dems use. This was the first time I’ve seen that memo and I gave my thoughts about it after I read it. Where was I wrong?

Yes, I'm sure it's just coincidence.

Ow. I rolled my eyes so hard I saw my optic nerves.

 

[Slade3200]

I'm not smoking anything. Maybe I should so I can understand your post.

Oh really? You mean there ain't no smoking gun with your fingerprints on it?

You're telling me a cop is taking your fingerprints at a gun sale to register your "lawfully" purchased Firearms for any other reason than to put you in prison? No. They hold even a legal gun purchase against you like a felony on your record the rest of your life.

I live in Kentucky, a rational state. No fingerprints required for a firearms purchase. Minimum age 18 for a handgun, no minimum age for shotguns or rifles.

This will make Slade3200 freak out.

Why would I freak out about that?

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

Frankly I have no clue what talking points Dems use. This was the first time I’ve seen that memo and I gave my thoughts about it after I read it. Where was I wrong?

Yes, I'm sure it's just coincidence.

Ow. I rolled my eyes so hard I saw my optic nerves.

good for you... why do you care so much to label me as a democrat anyways? It’s kind of a weird obsession

 

[Levant]

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

The Founders passed national carry.

 

[Levant]

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

I don't know if I'll take the time to read the entire post; I'll try. But let me address the above.

If your wife was raped and murdered by a man with a knife, do you want him to get a lesser sentence because he used a knife instead of a gun? That's just plain fucking stupid. Punish the crime, not the gun. We've been through this before. Though your name is 2aguy, you really don't understand the 2nd Amendment or the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Levant]

Do you not see a difference between a white collar, non violent criminal who didn't use a weapon, vs. a violent criminal who uses a gun for rape, robbery and murder?

And you see a difference between a violent, murdering, rapist who uses a knife and the one who uses a gun. I don't see the difference at all.

 

[Levant]

In most places they lose the right to vote. It may be a question for the Supreme Court......

At the same time.....would you allow child molestors to be able to work with children after their sentence?

The Constitution explicitly allows for denying the right to vote for crimes - read the 14th Amendment. There are zero other exceptions to the rights protected by the Constitution based on criminal behavior.

And I would never let the sentence end for a child molester so, no, they'd never work with children.

 

[Levant]

5th Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ​

In other words, you can be deprived of your rights with due process of law.

The 5th Amendment does NOT give the government the power to deprive people of their rights. Deprived of life or liberty is to be hung or incarcerated - for that they are entitled to due process. For taking their property, they are entitled to due process and just compensation. Nowhere in that does it say you can take their right to free speech, or their right to a trial by jury, or there right to freedom of religion - even with due process. If you can't take those rights, even with due process, why would someone interpret that to mean they can take their right to keep and bear arms as long as they get due process?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Only through licensed dealers....the system we currently have....and only if we can get the same data base the cops use and make background check instant. No reason that with the tech we have that we can't do that.

Felons should be restricted and we can discuss for how long after they are off of parole...

With my plan, however, violent gun criminals would be serving 30 years for any crime.... real crime.....committed with a gun.....and attempted murder or murder with a gun would be life...but preferably the death penalty...

So...... embezzle money and become a felon...lose your right to own a gun till your time is served....use a gun for rape, robbery or murder.......you go away minimum 30 years....no parole.

So, you agree with Slade3200 that reasonable restrictions and infringements are OK. Your only disagreement with him and O'Rourke are what infringements are reasonable.

Reasonable restrictions are not okay. But we need to stop the forward movement before we can take ground back. We can't get Republicans to pass national carry, how do you think we are going to get them to back ending current federal background checks at gun stores....?

Booooo, you’re backing off you earlier argument that felons should not be able to buy guns. That’s weak, I was looking for a good debate

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....

Mass shooters


1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....

What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Why shouldn’t gang members be allowed to walk around with a gun in their pants? Isn’t that their right? And to be clear you are supporting banning violent felons from owning guns right?

Under my plan they would be in jail.....so it becomes a non issue. If democrats let them out they should not be able to own or carry a gun.....and should be arrested and jailed if they do....

Thanks for clearing that up. Where does the constitution allow for released felons to be stripped of their rights to bare arms? Wouldn’t that be infringement?

5th Amendment​

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ​

In other words, you can be deprived of your rights with due process of law.

Kudos! You actually made a substantive non trolling argument... well done! Keep it up

So that's all you have to say?

Yeah, it was a good argument. What else do you want me to say?

an argument you were proven to be wrong and lacking

 

[bigrebnc1775]

5th Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ​

In other words, you can be deprived of your rights with due process of law.

The 5th Amendment does NOT give the government the power to deprive people of their rights. Deprived of life or liberty is to be hung or incarcerated - for that they are entitled to due process. For taking their property, they are entitled to due process and just compensation. Nowhere in that does it say you can take their right to free speech, or their right to a trial by jury, or there right to freedom of religion - even with due process. If you can't take those rights, even with due process, why would someone interpret that to mean they can take their right to keep and bear arms as long as they get due process?

when you have been convicted of a crime by a jury of your peers you lose all rights because of due process

 

[bigrebnc1775]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

You don't get it do you? You are really confused.

We don't want asshole Liberals decidining who is entitled to enjoy the Bill of Rights and who ain't. The reason is because you Liberal assholes will always be oppressive. A Liberal's list is oppressive. For instance, that asshole Obama put out a Justice Department memo shortly after getting into office that clearly said that Veterans and even Christians were potential terrorists. You can't allow potential terrorists to have guns, can you?

You obviously don’t understand what Liberal means... I think you’re trying to say Democrat or progressive.

im not even going to touch that BS you just tossed out about about Obama’s terrorist memo. Thats pretty pathetic, let’s just pretend you didn’t say that.

Yes, let's pretend he didn't say it. That way you don't have to defend the memo.

New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans

The memo speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs to be defended. It definitely does NOT say what Flash claimed it said

Yes, it does. Definitely. The Obama Administration declared veterans, among others, to be potential domestic terrorists.

All veterans? So every veteran was to be flagged and treated like a potential terrorist? Is that your claim?

Let's read what it says, shall we?

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

...

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

...

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Does that sound like the Obama Administration trusted veterans? Because, you know, obviously -- they didn't.

Oh look at that, he wasn’t talking about all vets he was talking about those having problems re-emerging into society After returning from battle. Crazy how things change we we look at the actual words and not your warped characterizations. Have you ever seen stats on suicide rates and PTSD that these poor soles experience? Now look at you trying to politicize them to mischaracterized Obama’s legitimate concern. That’s pretty sad

Oh, look at that, you're sucking Obama's ass.

Veteran's organizations, who care about veterans far more than you and Obama do, said the memo was bullshit and insulting to veterans. And Napolitano herself apologized for the report.

Your whole "IM NOT A DEMOCRAT" schtick would have a lot more traction if you didn't regurgitate Democrat bullshit.

He's a one hit blunder "I'm not a democrat but I support them"

Sometimes I do sometimes I dont

sure you do snowflake SMH

 

[2aguy]

Nope....... a guy who is a felon for embezzling money isn't the same as a guy who uses a gun for rape, robbery or murder.....

Again, here is my plan for actual criminals who use guns for crime....

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

I don't know if I'll take the time to read the entire post; I'll try. But let me address the above.

If your wife was raped and murdered by a man with a knife, do you want him to get a lesser sentence because he used a knife instead of a gun? That's just plain fucking stupid. Punish the crime, not the gun. We've been through this before. Though your name is 2aguy, you really don't understand the 2nd Amendment or the right to keep and bear arms.

I am addressing the gun crime issue....yes....that would mean that someone with a knife would recieve less time, but I am more than willing to have those sentences for any weapon. I understand the Right completely.....I am pointing out the silliness of the anti-gun extremist arguments...........been at this a long time.