So...why are Dems so focused on guns and NOT obvious FBI failures??

[Conservative65]

I've seen countless liberals complain about the supposed "intel failures" that lead to Orlando.

There's no actual evidence of any "intel failures", though.

It not the intel failure but the reality they knew the guy was a threat and did not keep him under surveillance or worked on busting him for the threat he was.

They investigated him at least three times, and his statements and pledges made it clear he was unstable and the fact he had contact with a known terrorist made him a possible threat.

When there is smoke there most likely a blaze that could kill many.

The FBI need to do a better job and if the Congress has to allow the FBI to flag those people like the Orlando shooter while making sure the FBI has the resources and trained staff to investigate those like the Orlando shooter.

Wrong.

In the United States we have two fundamental legal principles: presumption of innocence and due process of law.

The FBI, as is the case with all other law enforcement entities, may investigate suspected criminal activity to the extent that the evidence warrants it.

When there is no evidence to justify an investigation, the investigation ends, and appropriately so.

“When there is smoke there most likely a blaze that could kill many.”

This is known as presumption of guilt, contrary to our fundamental principles of law and justice.

Are you one of those that believes people on an FBI watch list shouldn't be denied the ability to buy guns?

 

[Rustic]

Remember when Democrats RIPPED into the intelligence community?? Oh I do. CIA. FBI. All of em. Especially with the WMD fiasco.

Well....honestly...the FBI dropped the ball big time. It's obvious.

Why aren't Dems knocking them again??? ALL they do is mention guns now. Not a peep about obvious Intel failures.

Because....they really really REALLY don't want to upset the FBI right now...

I think people just want to do something other than bitch and complain. I don't think a gun law is going to make a huge difference but it is something that could make it harder for sketchy people to get a gun, and we could be smarter about selling weapons that can do a large amount of damage. Everything that is being discussed is pretty common sense and it shows our government responding and taking action. It is also a very valid discussion to explore what was missed in the FBI investigation.

More gun laws will do absolutely nothing but make things worse. dumbass
Lol

 

[Rustic]

I've seen countless liberals complain about the supposed "intel failures" that lead to Orlando.

There's no actual evidence of any "intel failures", though.

It not the intel failure but the reality they knew the guy was a threat and did not keep him under surveillance or worked on busting him for the threat he was.

They investigated him at least three times, and his statements and pledges made it clear he was unstable and the fact he had contact with a known terrorist made him a possible threat.

When there is smoke there most likely a blaze that could kill many.

The FBI need to do a better job and if the Congress has to allow the FBI to flag those people like the Orlando shooter while making sure the FBI has the resources and trained staff to investigate those like the Orlando shooter.

Has anybody analyzed the big picture? How many people are on the watch list? How many man hours go into surveillance for each person? What criteria is used to continue or stop an investigation? From what i've heard they tracked this guy for 10 months and came up with nothing... Perhaps because he didn't do anything to break the law when they were looking at him and then he snapped. It is easy to criticize in hindsight and I hope we learn from this and improve our surveillance however, we also need to understand that not everybody is going to be caught... Even people that we are watching.

So what would a new Assault Weapon Ban do and seeing he was not on the No-Fly list how would the list had stopped him?

The reality is the FBI need to look over where they made the mistake and if they need money for resources and the House does not supply the money then the House need it balls kicked in.

Also if it is lack of training on the FBI part then hire and train more correctly.

If it is lack of communication between the States, The FBI and other agencies then figure out how to fix this.

Too much evidence pointing to the threat the man was and no reason why he was able to do what he did!

An Assault weapon ban takes weapons capable of killing dozens of people in less than a minute off the streets. I don't see any reasons for weapons like that to be out there. I own handguns and riffles and thats all I or anybody else needs for hunting, sport, or protection. I don't understand the big pushback from banning these types of weapons.

I agree this situation needs to be analyzed and measures taken to plug up the cracks. If what the previous poster said is true and there are a Millions names on the watch list and 20,000 being added each month then that is a pretty hefty task to effectively track all those people.

More people are killed by falling out of bed, then people killing with AR15s.
Trying to ban any one type of sporting rifle will absolutely do nothing to help stop these mass shootings. dumbass motherfucker
Lol

 

[Rustic]

It not the intel failure but the reality they knew the guy was a threat and did not keep him under surveillance or worked on busting him for the threat he was.

They investigated him at least three times, and his statements and pledges made it clear he was unstable and the fact he had contact with a known terrorist made him a possible threat.

When there is smoke there most likely a blaze that could kill many.

The FBI need to do a better job and if the Congress has to allow the FBI to flag those people like the Orlando shooter while making sure the FBI has the resources and trained staff to investigate those like the Orlando shooter.

Has anybody analyzed the big picture? How many people are on the watch list? How many man hours go into surveillance for each person? What criteria is used to continue or stop an investigation? From what i've heard they tracked this guy for 10 months and came up with nothing... Perhaps because he didn't do anything to break the law when they were looking at him and then he snapped. It is easy to criticize in hindsight and I hope we learn from this and improve our surveillance however, we also need to understand that not everybody is going to be caught... Even people that we are watching.

So what would a new Assault Weapon Ban do and seeing he was not on the No-Fly list how would the list had stopped him?

The reality is the FBI need to look over where they made the mistake and if they need money for resources and the House does not supply the money then the House need it balls kicked in.

Also if it is lack of training on the FBI part then hire and train more correctly.

If it is lack of communication between the States, The FBI and other agencies then figure out how to fix this.

Too much evidence pointing to the threat the man was and no reason why he was able to do what he did!

An Assault weapon ban takes weapons capable of killing dozens of people in less than a minute off the streets. I don't see any reasons for weapons like that to be out there. I own handguns and riffles and thats all I or anybody else needs for hunting, sport, or protection. I don't understand the big pushback from banning these types of weapons.

I agree this situation needs to be analyzed and measures taken to plug up the cracks. If what the previous poster said is true and there are a Millions names on the watch list and 20,000 being added each month then that is a pretty hefty task to effectively track all those people.

Well when one of your bans actually stop mass killings then I will agree but the reality is it never does.

I don't get it how the Progressive Left sit there saying that the average American should be punished for the Government failure in this whole ordeal but they do.

I have pointed out the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it stop the lone wolf terrorist and if you need evidence then explain Jonesboro and Columbine mass shootings and The OKC and Atlanta bombings?

People will kill and the Progressive left is under the impression that banning certain guns or every gun ( some on the fringe left want every gun banned ) will stop acts of violence but the reality is the criminal and terrorist does not obey the law nor will they ever.

So focus on the FBI failure and let stop punishing those that are not a threat to this country.

The average American is not getting punished by not being able to buy an assault rifle. There is no reason why we should have machine guns, bazookas, grenades, or any other weapon capable of mass destruction. We can still buy hand guns and riffles for protection. Making it harder for criminals to get weapons that can cause mass casualties in a short amount of time makes complete sense. It may not stop murders from happening but it decreases the body count. Any life saved is worth it

Most firearms used in crimes or either stolen or come from south of the border… Dip shit

 

[Rustic]

So what would a new Assault Weapon Ban do and seeing he was not on the No-Fly list how would the list had stopped him?

The reality is the FBI need to look over where they made the mistake and if they need money for resources and the House does not supply the money then the House need it balls kicked in.

Also if it is lack of training on the FBI part then hire and train more correctly.

If it is lack of communication between the States, The FBI and other agencies then figure out how to fix this.

Too much evidence pointing to the threat the man was and no reason why he was able to do what he did!

An Assault weapon ban takes weapons capable of killing dozens of people in less than a minute off the streets. I don't see any reasons for weapons like that to be out there. I own handguns and riffles and thats all I or anybody else needs for hunting, sport, or protection. I don't understand the big pushback from banning these types of weapons.

I agree this situation needs to be analyzed and measures taken to plug up the cracks. If what the previous poster said is true and there are a Millions names on the watch list and 20,000 being added each month then that is a pretty hefty task to effectively track all those people.

Well when one of your bans actually stop mass killings then I will agree but the reality is it never does.

I don't get it how the Progressive Left sit there saying that the average American should be punished for the Government failure in this whole ordeal but they do.

I have pointed out the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it stop the lone wolf terrorist and if you need evidence then explain Jonesboro and Columbine mass shootings and The OKC and Atlanta bombings?

People will kill and the Progressive left is under the impression that banning certain guns or every gun ( some on the fringe left want every gun banned ) will stop acts of violence but the reality is the criminal and terrorist does not obey the law nor will they ever.

So focus on the FBI failure and let stop punishing those that are not a threat to this country.

The average American is not getting punished by not being able to buy an assault rifle. There is no reason why we should have machine guns, bazookas, grenades, or any other weapon capable of mass destruction. We can still buy hand guns and riffles for protection. Making it harder for criminals to get weapons that can cause mass casualties in a short amount of time makes complete sense. It may not stop murders from happening but it decreases the body count. Any life saved is worth it

Wrong!

As I have pointed out many times now those like McVeigh did not need assault weapons and used a truck bomb and did more damage than any AR-15 ever did.

So let stop with the nonsense about how banning something will make it harder and admit the criminal will kill no matter what weapon they have at their disposal.

Also the criminal and terrorist does not care about your No-Fly list or Assault Weapon Ban and the assault weapon ban from 1994 to 2004 did nothing to detour mass shooters nor did it stop terrorism.

Finally, and maybe you can answer this question:

In 2009 the Senate had a Democratic Majority along with the House and did nothing to pass another Assault Weapon Ban and after the Democratic Party lost power the President wanted the opposition party to pass legislation on Assault Weapons, so why didn't he ask his own political party to do this before they lost power?

Now someone already told me because the mass shooting were not happening like they are now, but let me state again the Assault Weapon Ban ended in 2004 and many in the Democratic Party wanted it extended and when they had the power to do so why did they fail to do what they thought was best for the Nation?

Haha... WRONG! Nice response
To answer you question... I don't know what their discussions and motives were behind not extending the ban... Perhaps they were picking and choosing their battles.
Here is a question for you... Why do you care about assault weapons and automatic weapons? Why would you want easy access to guns that can spray bullets around a room? I agree that it is the criminals that kill and they will continue to do so with whatever they can get. My point is why would we make these kind of weapons easy to get? I'd rather go up against a criminal with a hand gun in a crowd than one with a machine gun... Wouldn't you? Just use your brain man, this one isn't hard to understand.

An ar15 is just a sporting rifle you fucking moron.
You have shit for brains you fucker… LOL

 

[Rustic]

Well when one of your bans actually stop mass killings then I will agree but the reality is it never does.

I don't get it how the Progressive Left sit there saying that the average American should be punished for the Government failure in this whole ordeal but they do.

I have pointed out the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it stop the lone wolf terrorist and if you need evidence then explain Jonesboro and Columbine mass shootings and The OKC and Atlanta bombings?

People will kill and the Progressive left is under the impression that banning certain guns or every gun ( some on the fringe left want every gun banned ) will stop acts of violence but the reality is the criminal and terrorist does not obey the law nor will they ever.

So focus on the FBI failure and let stop punishing those that are not a threat to this country.

The average American is not getting punished by not being able to buy an assault rifle. There is no reason why we should have machine guns, bazookas, grenades, or any other weapon capable of mass destruction. We can still buy hand guns and riffles for protection. Making it harder for criminals to get weapons that can cause mass casualties in a short amount of time makes complete sense. It may not stop murders from happening but it decreases the body count. Any life saved is worth it

Wrong!

As I have pointed out many times now those like McVeigh did not need assault weapons and used a truck bomb and did more damage than any AR-15 ever did.

So let stop with the nonsense about how banning something will make it harder and admit the criminal will kill no matter what weapon they have at their disposal.

Also the criminal and terrorist does not care about your No-Fly list or Assault Weapon Ban and the assault weapon ban from 1994 to 2004 did nothing to detour mass shooters nor did it stop terrorism.

Finally, and maybe you can answer this question:

In 2009 the Senate had a Democratic Majority along with the House and did nothing to pass another Assault Weapon Ban and after the Democratic Party lost power the President wanted the opposition party to pass legislation on Assault Weapons, so why didn't he ask his own political party to do this before they lost power?

Now someone already told me because the mass shooting were not happening like they are now, but let me state again the Assault Weapon Ban ended in 2004 and many in the Democratic Party wanted it extended and when they had the power to do so why did they fail to do what they thought was best for the Nation?

Haha... WRONG! Nice response
To answer you question... I don't know what their discussions and motives were behind not extending the ban... Perhaps they were picking and choosing their battles.
Here is a question for you... Why do you care about assault weapons and automatic weapons? Why would you want easy access to guns that can spray bullets around a room? I agree that it is the criminals that kill and they will continue to do so with whatever they can get. My point is why would we make these kind of weapons easy to get? I'd rather go up against a criminal with a hand gun in a crowd than one with a machine gun... Wouldn't you? Just use your brain man, this one isn't hard to understand.

Why don't you use your brain?

Any gun that can fire multiple rounds would be consider some form of assault weapon and that includes my pump action shotgun, so you are asking me to ban a weapon I use for hunting so that you can feel more safer at night.

As I pointed out the fact is the Democratic Party did not feel the need to pass a new Assault Weapon Ban from 2009 to 2011 and it was not until the Democratic Party was out of power of the House that President Obama started to call for the GOP to do what his own political party failed to do, so let cut the nonsense and admit the Assault Weapon Ban is nothing more than a Political Wedge Issue to get the base excited and maybe convince the dumber segments of society that it will stop terrorism or mass shooting.

So now I have explained why I don't want it but you have yet to find any reasonable excuse why President Obama did not deal with this issue when he had the House and Senate filled with members of his own political party that could have passed the bill...

Also the actual reality is Purple State Democrats know they will be booted out of office the minute they entertain such nonsense like Assault Weapon Ban because those in purple states lean more to protecting their right to bear arms.

What kind of shitty hunter needs an assault weapon to hunt? Thats like dropping dynamite in a pond and calling yourself a fisherman. Get a life.

I did give a reason, bigger fish to fly... instead of going through another political fight to pass the assault weapon ban perhaps they back burnered it to get healthcare or another of dozens of issues through.

Use my brain? ok, i'd much rather go against a hand gun or shotgun that needs reloading after a few shots over a automatic machine gun. No brainer.

You have no understanding of hunting you motherfucker, so go back to your mothers basement shit for brains… LOL

 

[Slade3200]

What kind of shitty hunter needs an assault weapon to hunt? Thats like dropping dynamite in a pond and calling yourself a fisherman. Get a life.

I did give a reason, bigger fish to fly... instead of going through another political fight to pass the assault weapon ban perhaps they back burnered it to get healthcare or another of dozens of issues through.

Use my brain? ok, i'd much rather go against a hand gun or shotgun that needs reloading after a few shots over a automatic machine gun. No brainer.

What machine gun are you talking about,there wasn't a machine gun used.
A shot gun is just as deadly. No

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

 

[Slade3200]

Remember when Democrats RIPPED into the intelligence community?? Oh I do. CIA. FBI. All of em. Especially with the WMD fiasco.

Well....honestly...the FBI dropped the ball big time. It's obvious.

Why aren't Dems knocking them again??? ALL they do is mention guns now. Not a peep about obvious Intel failures.

Because....they really really REALLY don't want to upset the FBI right now...

I think people just want to do something other than bitch and complain. I don't think a gun law is going to make a huge difference but it is something that could make it harder for sketchy people to get a gun, and we could be smarter about selling weapons that can do a large amount of damage. Everything that is being discussed is pretty common sense and it shows our government responding and taking action. It is also a very valid discussion to explore what was missed in the FBI investigation.

A sketchy person, to use your term, broke into my vehicle a few years ago and stole a gun from it. The vehicle was locked and on private property. The location of the gun was according to State law while sitting in my driveway. I broke absolutely no laws in the manner in which I kept the gun. The thief broke three. He entered my locked vehicle without a key, he came on private property without my permission, and he took something that didn't belong to him.

Tell me what law that could be put in place would have kept him from doing what he did or when he did it, doing a background check on him in order to determine whether or not he should possess it. You do know there are already laws in place that say he shouldn't have done what he did yet he still did it. Help me here. I'm trying to understand how more laws are going to prevent this type of situation where a sketchy person got a gun.

No law would have prevented that. Thanks to laws that prevented him from going to the nearest sporting goods store and buying the gun, he had to take the hard road and try to steal one. Too bad he didn't get caught.

 

[Rustic]

Wrong!

As I have pointed out many times now those like McVeigh did not need assault weapons and used a truck bomb and did more damage than any AR-15 ever did.

So let stop with the nonsense about how banning something will make it harder and admit the criminal will kill no matter what weapon they have at their disposal.

Also the criminal and terrorist does not care about your No-Fly list or Assault Weapon Ban and the assault weapon ban from 1994 to 2004 did nothing to detour mass shooters nor did it stop terrorism.

Finally, and maybe you can answer this question:

In 2009 the Senate had a Democratic Majority along with the House and did nothing to pass another Assault Weapon Ban and after the Democratic Party lost power the President wanted the opposition party to pass legislation on Assault Weapons, so why didn't he ask his own political party to do this before they lost power?

Now someone already told me because the mass shooting were not happening like they are now, but let me state again the Assault Weapon Ban ended in 2004 and many in the Democratic Party wanted it extended and when they had the power to do so why did they fail to do what they thought was best for the Nation?

Haha... WRONG! Nice response
To answer you question... I don't know what their discussions and motives were behind not extending the ban... Perhaps they were picking and choosing their battles.
Here is a question for you... Why do you care about assault weapons and automatic weapons? Why would you want easy access to guns that can spray bullets around a room? I agree that it is the criminals that kill and they will continue to do so with whatever they can get. My point is why would we make these kind of weapons easy to get? I'd rather go up against a criminal with a hand gun in a crowd than one with a machine gun... Wouldn't you? Just use your brain man, this one isn't hard to understand.

Why don't you use your brain?

Any gun that can fire multiple rounds would be consider some form of assault weapon and that includes my pump action shotgun, so you are asking me to ban a weapon I use for hunting so that you can feel more safer at night.

As I pointed out the fact is the Democratic Party did not feel the need to pass a new Assault Weapon Ban from 2009 to 2011 and it was not until the Democratic Party was out of power of the House that President Obama started to call for the GOP to do what his own political party failed to do, so let cut the nonsense and admit the Assault Weapon Ban is nothing more than a Political Wedge Issue to get the base excited and maybe convince the dumber segments of society that it will stop terrorism or mass shooting.

So now I have explained why I don't want it but you have yet to find any reasonable excuse why President Obama did not deal with this issue when he had the House and Senate filled with members of his own political party that could have passed the bill...

Also the actual reality is Purple State Democrats know they will be booted out of office the minute they entertain such nonsense like Assault Weapon Ban because those in purple states lean more to protecting their right to bear arms.

What kind of shitty hunter needs an assault weapon to hunt? Thats like dropping dynamite in a pond and calling yourself a fisherman. Get a life.

I did give a reason, bigger fish to fly... instead of going through another political fight to pass the assault weapon ban perhaps they back burnered it to get healthcare or another of dozens of issues through.

Use my brain? ok, i'd much rather go against a hand gun or shotgun that needs reloading after a few shots over a automatic machine gun. No brainer.

Pelosi does not even agree with you and in the link I will provide state you have to pick your battles and the Assault Weapon Ban is one they can not win:

Why Democrats aren't pushing an assault weapons ban

So even Pelosi is not stupid enough to pick this fight and if you read the article you will discover Democratic Senators voted against the 2013 ban, so when the President own political party says no, well it is a dead issue!

Now use your brain to understand that you can die as quickly from a truck bomb that McVeigh used as you can from someone like the Orlando shooter using a semi-automatic weapon.

Also mass shooters will not just bring one weapon but multiple weapons if they have to use handguns and pump action shotguns, and then you will call for a banning of those.

Also I use a pump action because of the fact I can kill more over time and less reload...

My single shot is home protection believe it or not and is Russian made...

Well then what are you complaining about? If no guns have been taken away and the dems are not pushing for it, then what are you bitching about?

I own guns, don't feel like my ability to buy more guns is in threat, and don't really care about assault weapons. I'm not going to make a fuss to get them banned but am also not going to stand in the way if people feel like they are too dangerous to put on the market. It shouldn't effect anybody's lives and actually could prevent death. I also support anything thing that makes guns safer and ensure that only responsible individuals own and carry. Too many dipshits out there that don't know what they are doing causing accidents and playing rambo.

You would not know a so-called "assault weapon" from a hole in the ground. And Ar15 is just a sporting rifle nothing more nothing less. shit for brains
You watch too many fucking dumbass Hollywood movies in your mothers basement thinking that it's as easy as spray and pray... Lol

 

[Rustic]

Remember when Democrats RIPPED into the intelligence community?? Oh I do. CIA. FBI. All of em. Especially with the WMD fiasco.

Well....honestly...the FBI dropped the ball big time. It's obvious.

Why aren't Dems knocking them again??? ALL they do is mention guns now. Not a peep about obvious Intel failures.

Because....they really really REALLY don't want to upset the FBI right now...

Criticizing the FBI, or any government agency, doesn't further the agenda of a tyrannical big government. Gun control is what they need to advance their agenda.

If it was about safety, they wouldn't drop investigations on potentially dangerous people due to political correctness. They would secure the borders and take a harder stance on criminals. They wouldn't create sitting ducks by putting up gun-free zone signs.

Right now, the plan is to continue creating as much fear as possible and push gun control as the solution. Usually, they gain support with shootings by making people believe that their gun control laws will actually make a difference. I don't think it's working now. After the Orlando shootings, gays and lesbians purchased record numbers of guns. People are realizing that their safety is in their own hands and NOT government's.

Have you been following anything in the news? Has ANYTHING been proposed to take away guns, limit the purchase of guns, or create gun free zones? They are talking about limiting sale of guns to people under FBI investigation and reviewing certain weapons that can cause mass casualties... It shouldn't be a big deal and isn't a crazy reaction to a horrible incident.

Just think if this Orlando nutjob would have been able to purchase a more destructive automatic weapon, more ammo, and the body armor he was going for... Guaranteed the body count would have been higher. Do you deny that?

How many people were killed by people using Ar15's?
There are millions upon millions of Ar15's out there, the percentage of them used in any deaths is so small it doesn't matter... Country is much bigger fish to fry. So get your control freak ass out of your mothers basement for once and see what the real world is like.
Lol

 

[Rustic]

What machine gun are you talking about,there wasn't a machine gun used.
A shot gun is just as deadly. No

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

An Ar15 is just the sporting rifle. shit for brains fucking kunt
Educate yourself instead of playing Nintendo in your mothers basement

 

[Rustic]

Wrong!

As I have pointed out many times now those like McVeigh did not need assault weapons and used a truck bomb and did more damage than any AR-15 ever did.

So let stop with the nonsense about how banning something will make it harder and admit the criminal will kill no matter what weapon they have at their disposal.

Also the criminal and terrorist does not care about your No-Fly list or Assault Weapon Ban and the assault weapon ban from 1994 to 2004 did nothing to detour mass shooters nor did it stop terrorism.

Finally, and maybe you can answer this question:

In 2009 the Senate had a Democratic Majority along with the House and did nothing to pass another Assault Weapon Ban and after the Democratic Party lost power the President wanted the opposition party to pass legislation on Assault Weapons, so why didn't he ask his own political party to do this before they lost power?

Now someone already told me because the mass shooting were not happening like they are now, but let me state again the Assault Weapon Ban ended in 2004 and many in the Democratic Party wanted it extended and when they had the power to do so why did they fail to do what they thought was best for the Nation?

Haha... WRONG! Nice response
To answer you question... I don't know what their discussions and motives were behind not extending the ban... Perhaps they were picking and choosing their battles.
Here is a question for you... Why do you care about assault weapons and automatic weapons? Why would you want easy access to guns that can spray bullets around a room? I agree that it is the criminals that kill and they will continue to do so with whatever they can get. My point is why would we make these kind of weapons easy to get? I'd rather go up against a criminal with a hand gun in a crowd than one with a machine gun... Wouldn't you? Just use your brain man, this one isn't hard to understand.

Why don't you use your brain?

Any gun that can fire multiple rounds would be consider some form of assault weapon and that includes my pump action shotgun, so you are asking me to ban a weapon I use for hunting so that you can feel more safer at night.

As I pointed out the fact is the Democratic Party did not feel the need to pass a new Assault Weapon Ban from 2009 to 2011 and it was not until the Democratic Party was out of power of the House that President Obama started to call for the GOP to do what his own political party failed to do, so let cut the nonsense and admit the Assault Weapon Ban is nothing more than a Political Wedge Issue to get the base excited and maybe convince the dumber segments of society that it will stop terrorism or mass shooting.

So now I have explained why I don't want it but you have yet to find any reasonable excuse why President Obama did not deal with this issue when he had the House and Senate filled with members of his own political party that could have passed the bill...

Also the actual reality is Purple State Democrats know they will be booted out of office the minute they entertain such nonsense like Assault Weapon Ban because those in purple states lean more to protecting their right to bear arms.

What kind of shitty hunter needs an assault weapon to hunt? Thats like dropping dynamite in a pond and calling yourself a fisherman. Get a life.

I did give a reason, bigger fish to fly... instead of going through another political fight to pass the assault weapon ban perhaps they back burnered it to get healthcare or another of dozens of issues through.

Use my brain? ok, i'd much rather go against a hand gun or shotgun that needs reloading after a few shots over a automatic machine gun. No brainer.

What machine gun are you talking about,there wasn't a machine gun used.
A shot gun is just as deadly. No

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Too bad you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground on identifying any type of rifle… LOL

 

[Rustic]

Why don't you use your brain?

Any gun that can fire multiple rounds would be consider some form of assault weapon and that includes my pump action shotgun, so you are asking me to ban a weapon I use for hunting so that you can feel more safer at night.

As I pointed out the fact is the Democratic Party did not feel the need to pass a new Assault Weapon Ban from 2009 to 2011 and it was not until the Democratic Party was out of power of the House that President Obama started to call for the GOP to do what his own political party failed to do, so let cut the nonsense and admit the Assault Weapon Ban is nothing more than a Political Wedge Issue to get the base excited and maybe convince the dumber segments of society that it will stop terrorism or mass shooting.

So now I have explained why I don't want it but you have yet to find any reasonable excuse why President Obama did not deal with this issue when he had the House and Senate filled with members of his own political party that could have passed the bill...

Also the actual reality is Purple State Democrats know they will be booted out of office the minute they entertain such nonsense like Assault Weapon Ban because those in purple states lean more to protecting their right to bear arms.

What kind of shitty hunter needs an assault weapon to hunt? Thats like dropping dynamite in a pond and calling yourself a fisherman. Get a life.

I did give a reason, bigger fish to fly... instead of going through another political fight to pass the assault weapon ban perhaps they back burnered it to get healthcare or another of dozens of issues through.

Use my brain? ok, i'd much rather go against a hand gun or shotgun that needs reloading after a few shots over a automatic machine gun. No brainer.

What machine gun are you talking about,there wasn't a machine gun used.
A shot gun is just as deadly. No

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Do you know what automatic weapon is? How many of them are used in mass shootings an/or crimes?
This is not Hollywood it's the real world get out of your mothers basement and see for yourself

 

[Brain357]

Remember when Democrats RIPPED into the intelligence community?? Oh I do. CIA. FBI. All of em. Especially with the WMD fiasco.

Well....honestly...the FBI dropped the ball big time. It's obvious.

Why aren't Dems knocking them again??? ALL they do is mention guns now. Not a peep about obvious Intel failures.

Because....they really really REALLY don't want to upset the FBI right now...

The FBI failure is harder to understand. Sure they could have spent more time on this guy, but they have limited resources. I assume they had others evidence led them to follow instead.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

What machine gun are you talking about,there wasn't a machine gun used.
A shot gun is just as deadly. No

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

I am not knee jerking with my comment and telling I do not believe the country need any other ban.

Now if you want to limit the access from places like Wal-Mart then I can understand that because I do not believe a place like Wal-Mart should be in the business selling firearms or ammo.

Now many on the right will disagree with me over this and I understand why because they believe even restricting the sales to Gun Shops will not stop the criminal nor the terrorist.

As for adding the AR-15 or those like the AR-15 to the same checks that are required for automatic machine guns, well that is possible but banning them no.

As I have pointed out with links the discussion about Assault Weapon Ban is a dead issue and the question will be now will those like me be alright with FBI checks or not?

Here in Texas I am allow to own a long rifle without any checks done on me which make my Shotguns legal to own and I can go to New Mexico with them. Now other states have different rules and now the question will be should I have to get a clearance from the FBI to own my long rifles and in my opinion no.

I can clear any FBI check and have many times so I don't need to worry about these laws any of you want to propose.

Gun laws in Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

It doesn't fit the progressive liberal narrative that its all an inanimate objects fault. Also we are still under the Obama administration its the WH's FBI. When has anyone in this administration been held accountable for anything ?

 

[Brain357]

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

An Ar15 is just the sporting rifle. shit for brains fucking kunt
Educate yourself instead of playing Nintendo in your mothers basement

That can kill many people really quickly. What sport is that?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I'm talking about the machine gun that Bruce thinks should be legally sold and not banned. He makes a case that banning weapons makes no difference and I just think that is BS. Yes, murders will still happen, but why legally and easily sell weapons that can inflict a massive amount of damage in short periods of time. There is no point.

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

I am not knee jerking with my comment and telling I do not believe the country need any other ban.

Now if you want to limit the access from places like Wal-Mart then I can understand that because I do not believe a place like Wal-Mart should be in the business selling firearms or ammo.

Now many on the right will disagree with me over this and I understand why because they believe even restricting the sales to Gun Shops will not stop the criminal nor the terrorist.

As for adding the AR-15 or those like the AR-15 to the same checks that are required for automatic machine guns, well that is possible but banning them no.

As I have pointed out with links the discussion about Assault Weapon Ban is a dead issue and the question will be now will those like me be alright with FBI checks or not?

Here in Texas I am allow to own a long rifle without any checks done on me which make my Shotguns legal to own and I can go to New Mexico with them. Now other states have different rules and now the question will be should I have to get a clearance from the FBI to own my long rifles and in my opinion no.

I can clear any FBI check and have many times so I don't need to worry about these laws any of you want to propose.

Gun laws in Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So don't ban semi-automatic weapons just make it prohibitively expensive and bury ownership under a mountain of red tape ?

 

[Rustic]

Right there you are lying!

I never wrote anything about automatic weapons and it is you switching to that debate because some are already outlawed and you can not buy an Uzi.

You need to read the ban list and discover certain weapons can not be obtained here in the states already and what the discussion is about is Assault Weapon Ban which will mean Semi-Automatic weapons and not Automatic weapons!

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

An Ar15 is just the sporting rifle. shit for brains fucking kunt
Educate yourself instead of playing Nintendo in your mothers basement

That can kill many people really quickly. What sport is that?

More people fall out of bed and die than are killed by people using a Ar15's. shit for brains
Lol

 

[Brain357]

You are right, you never said automatics and I apologize for putting words in your mouth. But let me ask, do you support the ban on automatic weapons? Given your most recent statements it sounds like you're against it but I'll let you speak for yourself.

Read my response and to obtain automatic weapons it is harder than you think. Background checks take longer and it is FBI. People need to research the issue before they tell me that i am for something that is harder to do than they realize.

The reality is you have restrictions on Automatic Weapons already and they are never used because those are weapons of war.

Also did you know they make a combat shotgun?

You need to research the differences.

Now one thing I will admit to is I believe Wal-Mart and stores like that should not be able to sell guns or ammo.

Gun store should be more restricted than what it is here in Texas and too many idiots can buy ammo easily from Wal-Mart.

So there is one thing you should start with first before going for the weapons ban you want.

The difficulty to get an automatic weapon is because of gun control measures. Do you support the automatic weapon restrictions that are in place? I think it is a good thing that people can't go to walmart and buy a machine gun. Whether other semi-auto guns should be on the list or not is a reasonable debate. I dont agree that all should but I think we should be able to have the discussion without the paranoid knee jerk reactions. I agree with you about the easy access at WalMart. There are a lot of common sense gun control measures that have been taken and do help.

An Ar15 is just the sporting rifle. shit for brains fucking kunt
Educate yourself instead of playing Nintendo in your mothers basement

That can kill many people really quickly. What sport is that?

More people fall out of bed and die than are killed by people using a Ar15's. shit for brains
Lol

Yes falling out of bed is more dangerous than an ar15. Are you stupid or just dishonest?