Why Do Liberals Want More Gun Laws? They Don't Enforce The Ones We Have..and Break Them...

[Cellblock2429]

Gun laws we need enforced and to close loopholes

1. Background checks on EVERY transaction. Gun shops, gun shows and personal transactions

2. Mandatory sharing of information on convicted felons and mental patients restricted from having guns. A single nationwide database that is continually updated

/----/ All to make it easier to confiscate the guns.

 

[boedicca]

Let's enforce background checks...100%

Translation: Let's get rid of incompetent and corrupt people in government. The problems with enforcement are the flaws of the government (not gun ownership by law-abiding people, btw.)

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

 

[rightwinger]

Gun laws we need enforced and to close loopholes

1. Background checks on EVERY transaction. Gun shops, gun shows and personal transactions

2. Mandatory sharing of information on convicted felons and mental patients restricted from having guns. A single nationwide database that is continually updated

/----/ All to make it easier to confiscate the guns.
View attachment 160983

300 million guns out there....doesn't look like they are doing much confiscating

 

[rightwinger]

Let's enforce background checks...100%

Translation: Let's get rid of incompetent and corrupt people in government. The problems with enforcement are the flaws of the government (not gun ownership by law-abiding people, btw.)

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

 

[boedicca]

Let's enforce background checks...100%

Translation: Let's get rid of incompetent and corrupt people in government. The problems with enforcement are the flaws of the government (not gun ownership by law-abiding people, btw.)

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

 

[nat4900]

"If you can't refute the facts, attack the messenger." - Saul Alynski.

When someone uses the adverb "RARELY" you should know that whatever follows is highly subjective and selective.........Thank me later for that little lesson....LOL

 

[Cellblock2429]

"If you can't refute the facts, attack the messenger." - Saul Alynski.

When someone uses the adverb "RARELY" you should know that whatever follows is highly subjective and selective.........Thank me later for that little lesson....LOL

/-----/ Again, try and refute the post without attacking the messenger. 30-40 out of 100,000 is rare. Billy Clintoon had a smiliar track record on convictions.
From the Daily Caller link: More than 100,000 convicted felons or other “prohibited persons” tried to buy guns each year during President Barack Obama’s administration by lying on their applications, but the Justice Department only considered prosecuting about 30 to 40 people each year, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

 

[rightwinger]

Let's enforce background checks...100%

Translation: Let's get rid of incompetent and corrupt people in government. The problems with enforcement are the flaws of the government (not gun ownership by law-abiding people, btw.)

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

 

[Cellblock2429]

Translation: Let's get rid of incompetent and corrupt people in government. The problems with enforcement are the flaws of the government (not gun ownership by law-abiding people, btw.)

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

 

[rightwinger]

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

Same applies to the no fly list

If you are wrongly placed on the no fly list, you can legally challenge it
Same goes if you are placed on the can't buy guns list

 

[Cellblock2429]

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

Same applies to the no fly list

If you are wrongly placed on the no fly list, you can legally challenge it
Same goes if you are placed on the can't buy guns list

/----/ AND what about: In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation. Besides, what better tool for gun grabbers to use is to declare opponents as suspected terrorists?

 

[nat4900]

according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

With the above, you've sustained my own assertion....Thanks....LOL

 

[rightwinger]

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

Same applies to the no fly list

If you are wrongly placed on the no fly list, you can legally challenge it
Same goes if you are placed on the can't buy guns list

/----/ AND what about: In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation. Besides, what better tool for gun grabbers to use is to declare opponents as suspected terrorists?

Hate to tell you...

But being a terrorist is much, much worse

 

[Cellblock2429]

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

Same applies to the no fly list

If you are wrongly placed on the no fly list, you can legally challenge it
Same goes if you are placed on the can't buy guns list

/----/ AND what about: In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation. Besides, what better tool for gun grabbers to use is to declare opponents as suspected terrorists?

Hate to tell you...

But being a terrorist is much, much worse

/----/ I suspect you are a terrorist therefore you lose your rights.

 

[Cellblock2429]

according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

With the above, you've sustained my own assertion....Thanks....LOL

/----/ Be a good Commie. Attack the messenger. ALWAYS

 

[kwc57]

I lived there for 5 1/2 years, and crime there was almost non existent. There were a few stupid liberals(redundant statement again), but they either lost their hand or head, depending on the crime....

Great . Except they trade freedom for that “safety”.

I wouldn't need any guns if the bad guys were executed. Isnt that a fair trade?

Good guys wh guns become bad guys with guns as soon as the gun is used for bad .

Bad guys with cars run over people on a NYC bridge...Shall all cars be banned?

No . But we do license drivers , regulate cars, register cars , transfer titles to cars .

How about we do that with guns too?

You don't have a constitutional right to a car.

 

[rightwinger]

The flaws are too many loopholes demanded by the NRA

B'loney. The NRA didn't demand that the DOD not provide data on service members who should be ineligible to own a gun.

I agree

But the NRA has made it harder to share information. There should be a single database for those restricted from having guns. It should include those on the terrorist watch list

That is an absolute crock.

It was the NRA who blocked banning terrorists from the no buy list

/----/ And for good reason. Apparently the gun grabbers didn't consider all of the facts.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

"As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word 'suspect' has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties," Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

I don't get you guys....

Your NRA dogma says to say....We don't enforce the gun laws we already have


Yet, when I discuss enforcing the laws we already have, you whine about how unfair they are

 

[Cellblock2429]

according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

With the above, you've sustained my own assertion....Thanks....LOL

/----/ You never justify your attack on the messenger the Daily Caller. All you do is repeat their name as if that has some implied meaning. Well I can play that game, Spanky.

The New York Times ???? NBC??? CNN??? ABC??? NPR???
Now refute the message.

 

[rightwinger]

Great . Except they trade freedom for that “safety”.

I wouldn't need any guns if the bad guys were executed. Isnt that a fair trade?

Good guys wh guns become bad guys with guns as soon as the gun is used for bad .

Bad guys with cars run over people on a NYC bridge...Shall all cars be banned?

No . But we do license drivers , regulate cars, register cars , transfer titles to cars .

How about we do that with guns too?

You don't have a constitutional right to a car.

Love it when you guys bring up the car analogy and then when we remind you about all the regulations about cars you whimper.......you don't have a constitutional right to a car

 

[Cellblock2429]

I wouldn't need any guns if the bad guys were executed. Isnt that a fair trade?

Good guys wh guns become bad guys with guns as soon as the gun is used for bad .

Bad guys with cars run over people on a NYC bridge...Shall all cars be banned?

No . But we do license drivers , regulate cars, register cars , transfer titles to cars .

How about we do that with guns too?

You don't have a constitutional right to a car.

Love it when you guys bring up the car analogy and then when we remind you about all the regulations about cars you whimper.......you don't have a constitutional right to a car

/----/ You don't. You have freedom of mobility but not to transportation. BTW Libtard Moonbats used the car analogy to justify the Obozocare mandate.