Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,447
- 2,290
How much more honest can you be you ask? Much more... you can start by not saying I said things like “spy” when I never said anything I’d the sort. That would be a good start.When did I say anything about spying?Which is why it should be a bipartisan deal.I would if we had that kind of control, but we won't if Democrats get enough power to make those decisions.
Spying on Americans and determining their ability to own a gun is not what our founders intended this federal government for. Once any law is in place, it's subject to manipulation by those in power down the road.
DumBama made a regulation that those on SS that cannot even write their own checks to pay bills not be allowed to own a firearm. Like how many old people on SS that couldn't pay bills became killers using a gun???
But this is what we are talking about here: party abuse. There are just some people in this country (and world) who have proven themselves never to be trusted. The Democrat party are those people.
Why do you have to make shit up? Let’s have an honest debate here
How much more honest can we be? The last two shooters were invisible to government, but left a trail of disturbing posts on social media. The only way to stop those people from getting guns is if we spied on their posts and determined they were a danger to the public.
Spying on Americans is not the only way, there are many ways to flag somebody at risk. It can be done by doctors, family, friends employers. And there would be a process to evaluate.
What would you propose Ray? Do nothing to prevent mental people from getting guns except for Arm those around them so they can defend themselves? What are your bright ideas?
Believe it or not, there are some problems that can't be solved.......not even by your precious government.
You want doctors, many who are leftists, to be able to determine if you are capable of exercising your constitutional rights? How about if we apply the same standards to voting? Would you be acceptable of that? What about free speech?
Family, friends, employers? Those people running to the government to get even with you for quitting your job, breaking up with your wife, a disagreement over a game of pool are not spying?
So let's say a family member reported either of these to recent shooters. How is government going to determine if they are mentally incompetent unless they do spy on these people? Just take the word of a family member or what? Or are you suggesting that it's okay to spy on them after they've been reported?