NRA is Getting Its Ass Kicked.

Benghazi was incompetence personified. People died because of it. That's not a good thing. However, it's not scary constitutionally. Nothing done was unconstitutional, it was just poor judgement (and should have led to a different election result). The IRS scandal is a case of government power being used directly and illegally to intimidate political views contrary to the ones in power. Much more scary, as it is an intentional abuse.

- - - Updated - - -

Disapproval ratings of legislatures is usually high. We hate them in general. However, most of us like our individual senator/representative.

 

I've known him the entire time. I know without a doubt that he doesn't have a criminal record. I know he has never been institutionalized in a mental health institution. Why should I have to do a background check of him to loan him a gun to go hunting with me?

Why should I have to ask permission of the government to exercise a right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights? It's absurd.

 

You're the one who hasn't shown any proof. Show it, or shut the F-CK up!!

 

FALSE! The EBCs can stop many (if not most) criminals from getting guns. The whole routine of selling guns in gun shows without background checks being done will be stopped. Those who would be dumb enough to keep doing it could easily be identified and arrested.

I have no problem with being restricted from selling guns to criminals and crazies, and I would have to be a bit concerned about anyone who would be so reckless, that he would let his greed for money overcome a basic responsibility to avoid doing things that would certainly endanger people.

All your talk about freedom seems tom be overlooking the freedoms that we lose if some freedoms are not restricted. I will exaggerate a bit just for demonstrative purposes, but you will see my point (if you're smart and don't have your head stuck in the sand). If we didn't restrict murderers from committing murder (by having a law against it) you may lose the "freedom" to be alive, period. If we didn't restrict the freedom of robbers to go around robbing people, you might not have a business, or any possesssions. Is this beginning to sink in ?

 

You don't know that, and neither does anyone else. Benghazi could have been deliberate. We don't know the factws of Benghazi before, during, or after it. And nothing is more important than our national security.

 

Problem with people who say "I know him. He doesn't have a criminal record, or any history of mental illness" is, oftentimes, it turns out the guy DOES have a criminal or mental illness past. Lots of people think they know everything about other people. They couldn't be more wrong. My mother raised me from birth. She was 30 years old when I was born. She was sweet and loving. But she could have had some criminal past that occured before I was born, and never knew anything about. Same with my ex-wife who I was married to for 22 years.

Ever watch the detective shows (true stories) on TV ? They are replete with ones about spouses who never know their spouse was criminal before they were married. You often don't know as much as you think you do.

 

First, the last study done showed that criminals got less than 1% of guns from gun shows. Second, the real problem is straw purchases. Nothing in that EBC law would have stopped straw purchases. They were already illegal. This just makes them more illegal. It's not going to stop them.

Nothing to do with greed, I love freedom. I have never sold a gun to anyone. I don't like the idea that I have to ask government permission to do something. The founders are rolling in their graves.

Our murder rate is half of what it was in 1993. It's back to 1960s levels. I don't see why a reducing crime rate requires more laws.

I don't think ownership of anything should be restricted. I do think that usage of things in an unlawful way should be punished. I think that people who use guns in crime should be given a minimum 20-life in prison if convicted. I just think that EBCs are just a way to harass law-abiding citizens (who will do the gun checks) and that there is nothing it would do to stop criminals, who are already breaking existing laws about buying guns.

 

Unless your head is in the sand, you should know that isn't the real problem. The real problem isn't law-abiding citizens being hoodwinked into selling guns to felons. The real problem is the friends and relatives of felons buying guns and then giving them to the felon (straw purchases). Straw purchases are not going to be stopped by EBCs.

I know my wife has no criminal record. I know my mother has none. Do you live with such shifty people that you have doubts?

That is my general observation about gun control fanatics like yourself. Those of us who are pro-gun generally trust other people. Anti-gun people don't. I think it's because anti-gun people are themselves not trustworthy, hence why they don't trust anybody else.

 

As will I since you cannot produce anything to the contrary.

 

Hey!!! They trust. They trust the government to take care of them cradle to grave, they trust government to protect them at all times, they trust that bad guys will follow the laws. See they trust allot.

 

What do you mean by "straw purchases" ? You mean somebody legally buying a gun, and then giving it to someone else ?

I don't think they are doing that at all. You seem to have a distorted conception about freedom. You think everything is supposed to be free ? When some things are more free, that makes other things less free, didn't you know ? If people were free to commit slander or libel, you would not be free to sue them and recoup whatever damages$$$ they caused you. If people were free to commit perjury, they might falsely accuse you of a crime, lessening your freedom to be free from false accusations. If people were free to light up barbeque pits anywhere they choose (in Florida they must be 10' from buildings), they might set one up right next to your front door and inundate your apartment with barbeque smoke, dam near killing your pets, when you weren't home (this happened to me because the imbeciles didn't know it was against the law, and they didn't have the common sense to know how to behave) Is this beginning to sink in ?

The murder example was just one example. There could be thousands of examples. Think, man, think. Pheeeeeww! (high-pitched whistle) Now you're really going off the brink. You don't think ownership of anything should be restricted ? Oh lord! And only "usage" is what you're concerned about ? So you'd be OK with people owning nuclear bombs ? With owning lions, tigers, elephants ? With owning poisonous gases ? With owning biological weapons of mass destruction ? You're willing to trust that these people (unknown to you) will all manage these things responsibly so that no harm might be done ? How about owning slaves ? Ok with that ? You said "ANYTHING".

As for, the EBCs doing nothing to stop criminals, who are already breaking existing laws about buying guns, I already explained how it would do that. I'm not going to keep repeating myself.

 

I said I wouldn't (not couldn't). And I stand behind that as well.

 

HA HA. No you don't know if your mother or wife has a criminal record, or commited crimes without being caught. Did you follow them around every minute of every day of their lives ? You don't know, and you just don't want to admit it. The only person I really know has not willfully ever commited a crime is ME, and this is true for everyone. You can't know any more than just yourself, and you could be wrong even about that, if your memory isn't up to par.

As for the straw purchases, certainly they would be reduced by the EBCs law. Only a total moron would buy a gun, go on record that THAT serial #d gun is THEIRS, and then trust that that gun is not going to wind up in the commission of a crime. Only an idiot would put himself in that position. Man, isn't life tough enough as it is ? What could be dumber than legally buying a gun, and then losing possession of it (and not being sure to notify the police that you no longer have it) ? Maybe smoking cigarettes might be dumber. Getting yourself addicted to a drug. Yeah, maybe that.

And what do you mean "Those of us who are pro-gun" ? I am staunchly pro-gun. I own 3 guns, and have a concealed weapon permit, and carry my Keltec .380 almost everywhere I go. And I am totally against needless gun control laws. But I don't do that stupidly. I not against EBCs, because obviously, they ARE necessary. And it is dumb attitudes like yours, that give all of us gun owners, and anti gun control people a bad name. You are hurting the cause of the 2nf Amendment, not helping it.

 

Of course. I assumed that you had basic knowledge. Maybe, I made a rash assumption.

Nope, I disagree.

People are allowed to slander. No law against it. Now, you can be sued for slander, which is a different matter. I guess you propose that we censor everything, and not allow something to be published unless it was slander (well, libel) free.

As slander. People are free to perjure. They can be punished for it, but that's a different matter. Your view is that someone should be pre-approved before speaking.

So there is a law for common sense? Also, there are trespassing/private property laws, which I do support.

I have no problem with ownership of the above, with the exception of slaves. (Slaves cannot be. Human beings cannot be owned. Slaves are the antithesis of freedom).

That said, people are responsbile for their actions.

How are straw purchases going to be stopped?
I haven't heard an explanation other than "the EBC will do it."

 

this is where you are wrong, again. As far as many folks are concerned, our personal safety far outweighs the state of the national security. It is because of the Libs agenda, world wide, that our president is kneeling before a foreign ruler, denounces Christianity, and acts without Congress' approval. He has ignored the bounds that keep our government in check through the lawful processes. He has gone after political opponents through the IRS, destroyed records of foul play, refuses to work with Congress on any of these events, Fast & Furious, buried all of his school records so he cannot be identified, stole 14 billion dollars from your kids and grandchildren, gifted the fatcat bankers with most of that 14 billion dollars, and has said he can rule without Congress or the Supreme Court. That is a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing dictator. And this is the guy you trust NOT to confiscate our guns? What a load of hooey.....................

 

What you said means nothing, the fact that you posted nothing speaks volumes.

 

Two different things. I know they don't have a criminal record that would preclude them from owning guns. To lose the right to own guns is major--requires a felony or domestic violence convictions. I know they haven't been convicted of those. Your beloved background checks don't check for crimes done but not convicted of.

The EBC law wouldn't record serial numbers, etc. Please show where in the law that any record of the background check is kept.

If it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

EBCs are unnecessary because they won't work. All they will do is inconvenience law-abiding citizens without stopping criminals.

 

I gave you benefit of the doubt that you weren't saying something totally ludicrous. Maybe, I made a rash assumption.

Sorry. No such thing as disagreeing with a fact.

Sounds like in your little vision of things, civil law doesn't exist. Well, EARTH TO PERDIDOCHAS: Civil law exists, right alongside civil law, and slander is against the law (civil). That's WHY you can be sued for it. Get it ?
And No, you don't guess that I propose we censor everything. Even you aren't that dumb.

Wrong again. No, people are NOT free to perjure. It is a crime. As for this "someone should be pre-approved before speaking" thing, it is too weird for me to even figure out what the hell you're talking about. But no, please don't tell me. I'm just fine not knowing.

I'm not sure what that strange question was supposed to mean either, but the post of your quote was trying to tell you that giving people more freedom for some things, takes freedom away from you - like in that case, freedom to have clean air inside your home.

So you have no problem with someone owning a nuclear bomb ?

Answer is in Post # 238. Did you read it ? It was written almost an hour before you asked this question.

 

What speaks volumes is you making the assinine statement that disapprovasl ratings don't correlate with losing elections, and then acting like you're getting away with that assinity by requesting that someday do something which would be a lot of work for him. Maybe if you paid me $100, i might spend some time on it for you.
EARTH TO WHALER17: Your statement is assinine whether I produce your (totally unneeded) research or not.

 

1. National Security IS our person safety. Want a nuclear missle on your roof ?

2. Our personal safety is enhanced by having EBCs, and jeopardized by allowing guns to be sold to criminals and crazies.

3. I have OPd and posted far worse things about Obama in this forum than what you mention here. As far as trusting him. No I don't trust him at all. But I don't see anything to suggest confiscating guns, and I think it is just a dumb ploy by Republicans to generate dislike and fear of Obama, and a lame one at that, since there are plenty of real serious things to trash Obama with, as I have been doing for 3 years in this forum. Read my OPs.

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...starting-new-term-killing-jobs-americans.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...-obama-administration-muslim-brotherhood.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/elect...omney-needs-mention-these-things-tonight.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/elections-campaigns/273791-i-voted-today-virgil-goode.html

 

I repeat. You only know your own record. As for EBCs, they do more than if they didn't exist. That's the point.

You have quite a habit of missing points, don't you. The straw buyers would be stupid to hand a gun that has their name on it to ANYONE. Get it ?

At this point, I'm guessing you're writing this from a prison cell, and you're due to get out soon, and you want to go out and buy a gun. That's what it looks like, anyway.

 

so, knowing that he is a liar and a thief, you want to turn our Rights over to him and his kind? AND trust that they are sincere in their public arguments? Sweet mother of Mary....................He's deliberately misled the public for 7 years, aided in covering up illegal activites, and you still trust that he WONT take the guns? wow............Just because he says it is so? You just admitted he cannot be trusted and lied, yet you are throwing yourself behind Maobama and his ilk?
Lets assume for one minute you are right and Obama isn't coming after the guns or ammunition (?), then I've lost nothing. Then let's look at it from the other side, what if I'm Right and you've aided and abetted criminal activity from the government by taking way my Right? What then?

 

How is it your so familiar with criminals and their activities? How much time have you done? What are your charges? Are you currently in prison yourself? I am beginning to think so............prolly a gun-related charge?

 

Not so much Junior, I provided a recent pertinent example. You provided......well nothing but an unsupported opinion.

 

I think the idea is that 89% of the respondents said they wanted an equal or greater amount of gun control. It's not untrue, it's just being used incorrectly. You can't use the the 39% of people who wanted them the same as reasoning to increase gun control; in any case, it's irrelevant because individuals have a right to trade the fruits of their labor so long as that voluntary transaction itself doesn't coerce others, which it doesn't. It's the independent choice of the buyer to use that weapon in a coercive way that we should be targeting, and gun manufacturers/merchants aren't responsible for that.

Guilt by association is wrong