Is Politicizing Tragedy Wrong?

[Iceweasel]

While painfully tragic, each of those incidences were not responsible gun ownership IMO

Completely right, but the right fought for each of them to have as many guns as they wanted right up until they killed someone. The term responsible gun owner wasn't accurately applied to all of those listed, was it?

Liar. We support gun rights for all law abiding citizens.

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

 

[iceberg]

So what is your point? (One sentence should be sufficient.)

His point is that he chooses to politicize gun tragedies to suit his agenda, hence the links in the OP, but doesn't want others to do it, duh.

Definition of hypocrite

1. 1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
   
   
2. 2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

And an example of how some on this forum deflect and use a variety of tactics to avoid talking about reality.

the reality is that the manner in which he set this up *is* hypocritical.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS BUT ONLY IF YOU AGREE WITH ME....

No, I disagree. He stated his point of view, and you have the ability to write your opposing view.

If you see ghosts where there aren't any, that doesn't make the OP hypocritical.

Frigid Weirdo- read this slowly several times, you may eventually understand it. He is bitching and moaning about the right politicizing gun tragedies, and how he thinks it's wrong to do so to advance their position. Then he turns around and post links to gun tragedies to advance his opposite position. That is the epitome of hypocrisy!

which is why i originally said he doesn't want to argue the point but do a WAH HEAR ME BUT YOU SHUT UP run and i'm tired of those.

 

[BULLDOG]

While painfully tragic, each of those incidences were not responsible gun ownership IMO

Completely right, but the right fought for each of them to have as many guns as they wanted right up until they killed someone. The term responsible gun owner wasn't accurately applied to all of those listed, was it?

Liar. We support gun rights for all law abiding citizens.

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

 

[Defiant1]

The President should take every opportunity to put America first and to protect the USA.

Even the ones who don't want to be protected.

 

[Iceweasel]

While painfully tragic, each of those incidences were not responsible gun ownership IMO

Completely right, but the right fought for each of them to have as many guns as they wanted right up until they killed someone. The term responsible gun owner wasn't accurately applied to all of those listed, was it?

Liar. We support gun rights for all law abiding citizens.

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

 

[BULLDOG]

Completely right, but the right fought for each of them to have as many guns as they wanted right up until they killed someone. The term responsible gun owner wasn't accurately applied to all of those listed, was it?

Liar. We support gun rights for all law abiding citizens.

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

 

[Correll]

Liar. We support gun rights for all law abiding citizens.

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

 

[LaDexter]

Politicizing tragedy is only wrong if it doesn't help the Democrats.

Abortion doc murders etc. are wonderful opportunities for the Democrats to politicize tragedy.

If the GOP does it, that's bad.

 

[oreo]

Anyone on a terrorist watch list--shouldn't be able to walk into a gun store to purchase weapons, nor should they be allowed to board a plane. That's irrational.

In fact the only people who wouldn't want a background check are people that couldn't pass them.

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

 

[Dragonlady]

European socialism can never work over here... because it can't work anywhere

It works in Canada, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and in every first world country in the world.

Americans are so paranoid that some undeserving person will get a freebie that every social program has means testing and security against fraud so that the administration of these programs costs more than the benefit provided.

It's the one of the lies conservatives tell themselves daily - like non-whites are stupid and don't work, white opioid abuse is different than drug use the inner city, and white Christians who kills Muslims and blacks aren't terrorists, they're "mentally ill", blacks and Muslims who kill whites are "terrorists", liberals are only voting for "free stuff".

Trump has embarrassed your country yet again in his response to the attacks in GB.

Trump is responding to ISIS like a trained monkey - pushing for his useless Muslim ban, and trying to start a Twitter feud with the Mayor of London. Real classy.

What's worse, Trump has yet to mention the white right wing terror attack against the men defending the Muslim girls from abuse on the train. Or the dozens of vandalized synagogues throughout America, except to suggest that these are "false flag" attacks.

What kind of fool politicized a terrorist attack to push his xenophobic agenda? Or tries to start a Twitter war with the mayor of the city which was attacked?

Oh wait, Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi!!!

 

[iceberg]

Anyone on a terrorist watch list--shouldn't be able to walk into a gun store to purchase weapons, nor should they be allowed to board a plane. That's irrational.

In fact the only people who wouldn't want a background check are people that couldn't pass them.

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

except you were never told your rights were taken away.
if you're on the terrorist list or nofly list there is no course of action or remediation to get you removed. if so, please feel free to google it and show me.
the NRA has said you're more than welcome to use these lists *IF* you add in due process. feel free to google it yourself.

i do not say we should not have a better system in place - we should. but the extremes on both sides have driven fear to the point of no return on the other side.

what i don't get about the gun show loophole also is - every *dealer* there MUST RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ALL SALES. period. they dont get the loophole law at all. so if you're at a gunshow selling your gun, just have a dealer run the check for $25 and be done with it.

you won't find me disagreeing with much of what you're saying - but you will find me fighting the use of arbitrary lists to ban someone from something w/o a set way to prove otherwise.

which the nofly and terror watch lists are.

 

[BULLDOG]

You just draw the line at expecting them to be responsible, right? You like to explain away the deaths in that list and all like them as caused by irresponsible people, yet, in your judgement, they were all completely responsible right up until the second they caused someone to die. Suddenly, your opinion of them drastically changes.

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

I'm sure there were lots of warning signs for each and every one of those nut jobs. I'm also saying the NRA and the right would have gone to court to support the right of any one of the above to have as many guns as they wanted right up until the instant they killed people.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, I expect law abiding citizens to be responsible. Odd huh? My opinion doesn't change at all, I called you a liar for a reason, it's what you do. Unlike you I don't want to punish the law abiding among us. Nor do I ignore the fact that many gun related shootings are not with legal guns.

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

I'm sure there were lots of warning signs for each and every one of those nut jobs. I'm also saying the NRA and the right would have gone to court to support the right of any one of the above to have as many guns as they wanted right up until the instant they killed people.

Liar. The NRA doesn't support nut cases.

 

[oreo]

Anyone on a terrorist watch list--shouldn't be able to walk into a gun store to purchase weapons, nor should they be allowed to board a plane. That's irrational.

In fact the only people who wouldn't want a background check are people that couldn't pass them.

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

except you were never told your rights were taken away.
if you're on the terrorist list or nofly list there is no course of action or remediation to get you removed. if so, please feel free to google it and show me.
the NRA has said you're more than welcome to use these lists *IF* you add in due process. feel free to google it yourself.

i do not say we should not have a better system in place - we should. but the extremes on both sides have driven fear to the point of no return on the other side.

what i don't get about the gun show loophole also is - every *dealer* there MUST RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ALL SALES. period. they dont get the loophole law at all. so if you're at a gunshow selling your gun, just have a dealer run the check for $25 and be done with it.

you won't find me disagreeing with much of what you're saying - but you will find me fighting the use of arbitrary lists to ban someone from something w/o a set way to prove otherwise.

which the nofly and terror watch lists are.

That the object of being on a terrorist watch list is--(you're not supposed to know you're on it. This is how they catch terrorists, before they act.) But when you try to purchase a plane ticket-you're going to be made very well aware of it, and at that time (if you're not a terrorist) you can appeal it. There is absolutely no reason a person that is on a terrorist watch list should not be added to a no gun list also. Straw buyers have to be penalized also, and charged with the same crime as the person who uses a gun bought by someone else to commit a crime.

If you own guns you have to be a responsible gun owner. Parents need to keep their guns away from kids, especially emotionally unstable teenagers. Locked secure gun cabinets work great for that.

My sister in law works for the Sheriffs office--and does concealed weapons permits in Colorado and this is how I know this. Everyone has a right to appeal being denied on a gun purchase--that's a no brainer. It''s not costly, you don't need an attorney--you fill out a form-- appear before a judge--explain your circumstance and he/she will look it over and make a decision. It's a very common practice--and it's a fairly quick process also.

Here is Colorado law:
Colorado Gun Laws - Gun | Laws.com

Really it's this constant refusal to address common sense issues--that cause mass murder--that puts the 2nd amendment in danger.

 

[iceberg]

Anyone on a terrorist watch list--shouldn't be able to walk into a gun store to purchase weapons, nor should they be allowed to board a plane. That's irrational.

In fact the only people who wouldn't want a background check are people that couldn't pass them.

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

except you were never told your rights were taken away.
if you're on the terrorist list or nofly list there is no course of action or remediation to get you removed. if so, please feel free to google it and show me.
the NRA has said you're more than welcome to use these lists *IF* you add in due process. feel free to google it yourself.

i do not say we should not have a better system in place - we should. but the extremes on both sides have driven fear to the point of no return on the other side.

what i don't get about the gun show loophole also is - every *dealer* there MUST RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ALL SALES. period. they dont get the loophole law at all. so if you're at a gunshow selling your gun, just have a dealer run the check for $25 and be done with it.

you won't find me disagreeing with much of what you're saying - but you will find me fighting the use of arbitrary lists to ban someone from something w/o a set way to prove otherwise.

which the nofly and terror watch lists are.

That the object of being on a terrorist watch list is--(you're not supposed to know you're on it. This is how they catch terrorists, before they act.) But when you try to purchase a plane ticket-you're going to be made very well aware of it, and at that time (if you're not a terrorist) you can appeal it. There is absolutely no reason a person that is on a terrorist watch list should not be added to a no gun list also. Straw buyers have to be penalized also, and charged with the same crime as the person who uses it to commit a crime.

My sister in law works for the Sheriffs office--and does concealed weapons permits in Colorado and this is how I know this. Everyone has a right to appeal being denied on a gun purchase--that's a no brainer. It''s not costly, you don't need an attorney--you fill out a form-- appear before a judge--explain your circumstance and he/she will look it over and make a decision. It's a very common practice--and it's a fairly quick process also.

Here is Colorado law:
Colorado Gun Laws - Gun | Laws.com

Really it's this constant refusal to address common sense issues--that cause mass murder--that puts the 2nd amendment in danger.

so we can make a list
make it impossible to get off the list
put you on it and not tell you
now start denying you rights cause you're on a made up list you never knew about
make it impossible to get off the list

it's the refusal to see the idiocy behind crap like this that forces the other side to dig in just as deep to stop you. "common sense laws" will never be around as long as you fight for only 1 side of the equation of which you are doing.

 

[BULLDOG]

You call me a liar because you are a RWNJ, and that's hat you do. Not surprised you can never point out the specific lie you seem to reference.

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

I'm sure there were lots of warning signs for each and every one of those nut jobs. I'm also saying the NRA and the right would have gone to court to support the right of any one of the above to have as many guns as they wanted right up until the instant they killed people.

Liar. The NRA doesn't support nut cases.

So list all the efforts they have made to keep guns out of the hands of people who can't even run their on affairs.

 

[Iceweasel]

I always say what you lied about. So that's another lie. You lied when you said the right is fighting for crazies to own guns and you lied when you said my opinion changes. The words are still there. Your little hate filled pea brain just can't do any better.

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

I'm sure there were lots of warning signs for each and every one of those nut jobs. I'm also saying the NRA and the right would have gone to court to support the right of any one of the above to have as many guns as they wanted right up until the instant they killed people.

Liar. The NRA doesn't support nut cases.

So list all the efforts they have made to keep guns out of the hands of people who can't even run their on affairs.

Ah, now you shifted the subject from nuts to those that can't deal with government paperwork.

Like I said, you're dishonest. And no, I don't work for retards.

 

[BULLDOG]

Anyone on a terrorist watch list--shouldn't be able to walk into a gun store to purchase weapons, nor should they be allowed to board a plane. That's irrational.

In fact the only people who wouldn't want a background check are people that couldn't pass them.

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

except you were never told your rights were taken away.
if you're on the terrorist list or nofly list there is no course of action or remediation to get you removed. if so, please feel free to google it and show me.
the NRA has said you're more than welcome to use these lists *IF* you add in due process. feel free to google it yourself.

i do not say we should not have a better system in place - we should. but the extremes on both sides have driven fear to the point of no return on the other side.

what i don't get about the gun show loophole also is - every *dealer* there MUST RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ALL SALES. period. they dont get the loophole law at all. so if you're at a gunshow selling your gun, just have a dealer run the check for $25 and be done with it.

you won't find me disagreeing with much of what you're saying - but you will find me fighting the use of arbitrary lists to ban someone from something w/o a set way to prove otherwise.

which the nofly and terror watch lists are.

That the object of being on a terrorist watch list is--(you're not supposed to know you're on it. This is how they catch terrorists, before they act.) But when you try to purchase a plane ticket-you're going to be made very well aware of it, and at that time (if you're not a terrorist) you can appeal it. There is absolutely no reason a person that is on a terrorist watch list should not be added to a no gun list also. Straw buyers have to be penalized also, and charged with the same crime as the person who uses it to commit a crime.

My sister in law works for the Sheriffs office--and does concealed weapons permits in Colorado and this is how I know this. Everyone has a right to appeal being denied on a gun purchase--that's a no brainer. It''s not costly, you don't need an attorney--you fill out a form-- appear before a judge--explain your circumstance and he/she will look it over and make a decision. It's a very common practice--and it's a fairly quick process also.

Here is Colorado law:
Colorado Gun Laws - Gun | Laws.com

Really it's this constant refusal to address common sense issues--that cause mass murder--that puts the 2nd amendment in danger.

so we can make a list
make it impossible to get off the list
put you on it and not tell you
now start denying you rights cause you're on a made up list you never knew about
make it impossible to get off the list

it's the refusal to see the idiocy behind crap like this that forces the other side to dig in just as deep to stop you. "common sense laws" will never be around as long as you fight for only 1 side of the equation of which you are doing.

Don't be silly. There is a procedure for being removed from the list if you are wrongly put on it. Your claim is stupid to start with.

 

[iceberg]

on the surface i would agree. but i now ask you -

1) how do you get on this list?
2) how do you get off of it?
3) when put on it, are you told or are you just "on it"?
4) is it you or just a name like you and ergo, subject to confusion

since the terrorist watch list isn't anything official nor does it have a mechanism in it to get off of it if you're there improperly - you have lost your right to "due process" - so for you to just say "use the terrorist watch list - it's common sense!" is to also say "fuck due process".

are you ok with bypassing due process?

and the terrorist watch list doesn't have much of anything to do with background checks.

If you're denied on a background check for a gun--you have your rights to appeal it--if you feel there is an error in the report--that is standard practice.

So you're 1, 2, 3 & 4 just went up in smoke. Because an appeal process is due process.

In Colorado we went through this a few years ago. BTW I am gun owner. Private sales are no longer allowed in this state--all sales go through a Licensed gun dealer. If you sell to a private person without a background check you lose your right to own a gun. So most people who want to sell their guns drop them off at a gun dealer to sell on consignment. You can order guns on the internet but it is shipped to a licensed gun dealer and you will get a background check when you pick it up. Extended background checks are done, including mental health. Gun shows also go through a background checks. The only thing we got pissed off about was the 9 clip rule they stuck in there.

I live in the 6th most heavily armed county in the United States and we have no gun violence. It is because these guns are in the right hands, not the wrong hands. Common sense extended background checks have in no way deterred us from owning guns.

except you were never told your rights were taken away.
if you're on the terrorist list or nofly list there is no course of action or remediation to get you removed. if so, please feel free to google it and show me.
the NRA has said you're more than welcome to use these lists *IF* you add in due process. feel free to google it yourself.

i do not say we should not have a better system in place - we should. but the extremes on both sides have driven fear to the point of no return on the other side.

what i don't get about the gun show loophole also is - every *dealer* there MUST RUN A BACKGROUND CHECK ON ALL SALES. period. they dont get the loophole law at all. so if you're at a gunshow selling your gun, just have a dealer run the check for $25 and be done with it.

you won't find me disagreeing with much of what you're saying - but you will find me fighting the use of arbitrary lists to ban someone from something w/o a set way to prove otherwise.

which the nofly and terror watch lists are.

That the object of being on a terrorist watch list is--(you're not supposed to know you're on it. This is how they catch terrorists, before they act.) But when you try to purchase a plane ticket-you're going to be made very well aware of it, and at that time (if you're not a terrorist) you can appeal it. There is absolutely no reason a person that is on a terrorist watch list should not be added to a no gun list also. Straw buyers have to be penalized also, and charged with the same crime as the person who uses it to commit a crime.

My sister in law works for the Sheriffs office--and does concealed weapons permits in Colorado and this is how I know this. Everyone has a right to appeal being denied on a gun purchase--that's a no brainer. It''s not costly, you don't need an attorney--you fill out a form-- appear before a judge--explain your circumstance and he/she will look it over and make a decision. It's a very common practice--and it's a fairly quick process also.

Here is Colorado law:
Colorado Gun Laws - Gun | Laws.com

Really it's this constant refusal to address common sense issues--that cause mass murder--that puts the 2nd amendment in danger.

so we can make a list
make it impossible to get off the list
put you on it and not tell you
now start denying you rights cause you're on a made up list you never knew about
make it impossible to get off the list

it's the refusal to see the idiocy behind crap like this that forces the other side to dig in just as deep to stop you. "common sense laws" will never be around as long as you fight for only 1 side of the equation of which you are doing.

Don't be silly. There is a procedure for being removed from the list if you are wrongly put on it. Your claim is stupid to start with.

then it shouldn't be hard to show me the process then, would it?

 

[BULLDOG]

The NRA fought for every one of these people to be fully armed right up until the second they killed their first person. Don't tell me the right doesn't support arming crazies.

I thought that the NRA supported locking up crazy people.

I know I certainly do.


You claiming there were no warning signs for any of those whack jobs?

I'm sure there were lots of warning signs for each and every one of those nut jobs. I'm also saying the NRA and the right would have gone to court to support the right of any one of the above to have as many guns as they wanted right up until the instant they killed people.

Liar. The NRA doesn't support nut cases.

So list all the efforts they have made to keep guns out of the hands of people who can't even run their on affairs.

Ah, now you shifted the subject from nuts to those that can't deal with government paperwork.

Like I said, you're dishonest. And no, I don't work for retards.

No.