United States & Gun Control discussion.

I'm actually not sure I'm against it at this point. I don't like the lack of due process, but apparently this last asshole was being investigated and fucking wreaked shop. I don't wanna see that again, before I go full WTF on the operation, i will say, dude shouldn't have been able to buy a gun, regardless of type.

$.02

He was a naturally born US citizen!

So clearly there is shit out there that the FBI missed so the plan is to regulate due process, a cornerstone of freedom that keeps us apart from Russia or insert your authoritarian regime?

If he was a Christian militia member would he be treated with kid gloves? Regardless what our politicians will say, Islam is at war with us.
 
He was a naturally born US citizen!

So clearly there is shit out there that the FBI missed so the plan is to regulate due process, a cornerstone of freedom that keeps us apart from Russia or insert your authoritarian regime?

If he was a Christian militia member would he be treated with kid gloves? Regardless what our politicians will say, Islam is at war with us.
Not to mention that DHS vetted him for a sensitive position. The security company is contracted by DHS for security at many locations. So, in essence, he was 'vetted' by two federal agencies. No matter the list, check, verification, anal probe, or other measure.... you cannot stop a determined individual you know nothing about.
 
I don't really like the idea of not being able to buy a gun just because you are on a watch list.

A line has to be drawn somewhere regarding who can or can not be trusted. The watch list seems to be the logical choice.

The problem with the watch list is a mistaken entry means an innocent person can no longer fly, and they are not keen on removing people from the list.
They also try to avoid telling why you were put on the list.


It's another case of that pesky Constitution and it's amendments, particularly the 14th. It ensures that you can't be denied life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

A watch list isn't a trial by jury, or a ruling by a judge, and I don't think it was created by elected legislators either.
 
Not to mention that DHS vetted him for a sensitive position. The security company is contracted by DHS for security at many locations. So, in essence, he was 'vetted' by two federal agencies. No matter the list, check, verification, anal probe, or other measure.... you cannot stop a determined individual you know nothing about.

You can ban guns but you can't read minds. The determined individual will find a way to kill. (See 9/11 etc.)
 
Interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?_r=0

But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.

It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.

In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.

The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.

Annually, 5,000 to 6,000 black men are murdered with guns. Black men amount to only 6 percent of the population. Yet of the 30 Americans on average shot to death each day, half are black males.
 
In order to restrict any right, there needs to be due process, otherwise we'll all end up on some list because we say something dumb that we are just joking about or make for dramatic effect but don't mean.
 
I have to agree with ^^^^^^^. In some ways it does smack of McCarthyism.
Extremely relevant: Newt Gingrich wants new House Un-American Activities Committee - CNNPolitics.com

Newt Gingrich wants new House Un-American Activities Committee
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is calling for the creation of a new House Committee on Un-American Activities, invoking the infamous "Red Scare"-era congressional body as a blueprint for weeding out American ISIS adherents and sympathizers.

"We originally created the House Un-American Activities Committee to go after Nazis," he said during an appearance on "Fox and Friends" this week. "We passed several laws in 1938 and 1939 to go after Nazis and we made it illegal to help the Nazis. We're going to presently have to go take the similar steps here."
Gingrich, a vocal supporter of Donald Drumpf, has been touted as a potential running mate for the presumptive Republican nominee.
 
Extremely relevant: Newt Gingrich wants new House Un-American Activities Committee - CNNPolitics.com

Newt Gingrich wants new House Un-American Activities Committee

He never said the wants that specific House committee but was describing the history. He did say we need similar steps to make it illegal to go after Nazis and their supporters. The implication is that the US needs to take steps against terrorist support networks.

This is EXACTLY like Clinton's exchange with Stephanoplois.
 
Something bad happened. Pass a law! Against what? Against bad things!!!

Thank God there is a legislative body to slow things down and not be so reactive.

'No Fly, No Buy' Has Political Support, But May Have Little Impact


But many experts question whether the so-called "no fly, no buy" approach would be effective, noting that it would not have prevented several of the most grisly recent mass shootings in Orlando, Florida; San Bernardino, California; and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

The reason: None of the attackers were among the more than 1.1 million people on the government's databases of suspected terrorists, including those with potential extremist ties banned from flying while under investigation.
 
A great article which makes many of the same points found on this board. The good stuff is too numerous to list, but this sums it up nicely.

The Media Keeps Misfiring When It Writes About Guns

There are many reasons that this cycle repeats as it does. We live in a divided society where people cocoon with like-minded allies, and we’ve stopped listening to the other side. The NRA is powerful. We get distracted and move on to the next shiny thing. But one important point: The mainstream media lobbies hard for gun control, but it is very, very bad at gun journalism. It might be impossible ever to bridge the divide between the gun-control and gun-rights movements. But it’s impossible to start a dialogue when you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
 
Back
Top