Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Think that CCW permit holder is a safe individual? Maybe not:

page: 26
11
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Another_Nut

In point of fact, NavyDoc helpfully corrected me with enough to follow for a confirmation. If you'd read my reply, I not only thanked him but added a link of my own giving more background to how correct he was, and how mistaken I'd been.

Sometimes people do admit when they are wrong. Check and see if they have before assuming they have not. I was ignorant, and I took responsibility for it. We have a misunderstanding here. Nothing more.




posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

we're not arguing against our own point.

what you said, makes ABSOLUTELY no sense....let's take a look, shall we?


You all are saying that they aren't enforcing the laws on the books


this is true.



and when legislation comes up to do just that, you argue against it.


and this is where you go off the rails....how exactly does new legislation address the issue of existing laws not being enforced? new legislation is for new laws..which we don't need....



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
and this is where you go off the rails....how exactly does new legislation address the issue of existing laws not being enforced? new legislation is for new laws..which we don't need....


Wait a second, pal. How do you expect law enforcement to enforce laws unless we regularly pass laws to enforce the previously passed laws?





edit on 31-7-2014 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer because his mug got filled with chemtrail residue



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

nice try, but i'll not have you using me, or twisting my words to further your nutjob argument.

I pointed out that people had problems, yes....but i also pointed out people who had lied on their federal forms, bought guns with expired permits, law enforcement departments who failed to confiscate weapons held by prohibited persons, and people who should have been made prohibited persons, but weren't, due to technicalities, police negligence, or legal wizardry...

i presented facts. don't you DARE sit there, and twist what i said...



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:41 PM
link   
As I have pointed out multiple times, there will never be one law that will prevent all crime from ever happening. Stop trying to use that point, it's sad and idiotic.

As I have pointed out multiple times, it was y'all that said that the background check law was not being enforced. Now, we have legislation that if made law would force the background check law to be enforced. This law does nothing to infringe on your rights to own a firearm (unless of course there's something you have done that would prevent you from legally owning a firearm to begin with) all it does is reengages this measure so that it works and therefore eliminates people like I listed in the OP from getting a firearm legally.

The gun lobby is actually fighting against this (for some stupid reason) It's actually what you say you want to happen, background checks weeding out the people that shouldn't have anything to do with firearms from obtaining them legally like the people in the OP were able to do.

But for some weird reason, you want to argue against it? Why? It's your valid point after all. I suspect that you actually understand this, because this thread has deteriorated into asinine trollish comments by the pro gun forum gang instead of actual discussion.

Yes, I am frustrated at this point. Because I have given you information after information, only to be ridiculed about my job, nit picked about crap that has nothing to do with the point at hand, when I present a new valid argument that does support my original point, it's buried in prolific postings about nonsense.

Do you all understand that gun violence in this country is an actual problem? If you do, do you understand that there are people that are working against trying to alleviate those problems while at the same time trying to not infringe on your right to keep and bear arms?

But instead, your frustrating paranoia only leads me to conclude that you don't mind all the actual gun violence that is entirely preventable in this country. That in fact, you encourage it, welcome it, and celebrate it.

Otherwise, any sane person would actually want to do something constructive about it. Like enforce background check laws that may prevent people who should not have a firearm from obtaining a firearm legally.

I get it, your a forum gang, it's your task on this website to completely disrupt topics that go against your pre-conceived ideology, any thread that pops up that is even slightly critical of the pervasive gun culture in America you descend upon like wolves hunting for the kill.

But this is an important issue in our society, and the more mass shootings that occur by people who are able to obtain a firearm legally in this country the more the public is going to want to do something to end the cycle of violence, and eventually they are going to see through your propaganda campaign and see that maybe (and I hope it doesn't happen) but maybe, we should repeal the 2nd Amendment.

I understand the need for the 2nd Amendment, I really do, a person has the right to defend themselves. However, I'm not arguing about people defending themselves, I am arguing that some people should not ever have had access to firearms because either their mental illness or their criminal background predisposes them to violence.

Sure, maybe some state laws are a little over the top, like "butcherguy's New Jersey law" that apparently getting caught with a hollow point bullet rolling haphazardly around the floorboards will get you a bullet in the back of the head by a NJ cop. (not really sure of the veracity of that law, pretty sure that violates quite a few legal precedents not to mention the bill of rights) But butcherguy is convinced of it none the less. (see paranoia above)

Y'all say we need to enforce the laws on the books, I agree, but the aren't being enforced, and by the Obama administration of all people. Hell, if FOX News and y'all are to be believed, Obama and Holder are out to personally take every gun out of every person's hand in the country, but it doesn't jive with the reality that people who shouldn't have been given access to a gun at all, are able to obtain them legally, which makes the Obama administration the single best friend of the pro gun crowd in decades in the white house.

So, go ahead, troll on pro gun forum gang, troll on, but the point is the same, you want background checks, there is a bill to do just that, and instead of fighting against it, do yourselves a favor and try the opposite approach, and maybe we can reduce the amount, severity, and frequency of these mass shootings.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

could it possibly be that that piece of legislation ran into trouble because of riders, or the petty pissing contest the republicans and democrats got into over amendments?

dems suggest something insane like reinforcing the ban on "large capacity" magazines (which are, in actuality, standard capacity), or to reinforce an outright ban on "assault weapons" and to "To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes." (which are, in actuality, no more or less dangerous than their non-assault versions), the republicans make sure they don't make it onto the bill, so then when a republican suggests an amendment to "To address gun violence, improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, address mental illness in the criminal justice system, and end straw purchases and trafficking of illegal firearms, and for other purposes.", it gets crapped on by the dems, and then they introduce something decent, and it gets crapped on by the republicans....

it's all bulls**t....it's not the gun lobby, it's the moron "clubs" in the congress...can't let the other club get a leg up on us, or else we might lose all this power.....you wanna blame someone? blame our dysfunctional federal government..



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok




Sure, maybe some state laws are a little over the top, like "butcherguy's New Jersey law" that apparently getting caught with a hollow point bullet rolling haphazardly around the floorboards will get you a bullet in the back of the head by a NJ cop. (not really sure of the veracity of that law, pretty sure that violates quite a few legal precedents not to mention the bill of rights) But butcherguy is convinced of it none the less. (see paranoia above)

How many times do we have to cover this...
Oh yeah, this is HauntWok so it will be endless............................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................... Since it is so over the top, allowing for ten years in prison for the possession of one hollowpoint, HautWok has to go to great extremes to make a joke of it....... that is all he can do, because the law is a travesty.
edit on b000000312014-07-31T14:02:45-05:0002America/ChicagoThu, 31 Jul 2014 14:02:45 -0500200000014 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

we avoid all that, by replacing Eric Holder with Xzibit.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok




Thanks for regurgitating all of your talking points from (2) threads into this post.

You still don't get it. Or.........you are purposefully stating otherwise.

Your info provided is still fictitious, or omits portions.
You still don't address specific individual points within YOUR threads.

Infringement is still infringement. Requiring someone to submit to anything is still infringement.

And your juvenile 1:1 correlations still don't provide logical connections.

YOU and YOU alone brought up your profession. No one else. That is all on you.

Please, go research all the bans regarding importation of not only firearms, but parts and even raw materials associated with this.

The policies being driven with the ATF is a factual and clear indication that the Govt is hostile to private ownership of firearms and businesses as well.
The DOJ has instructed Banks to cut ties with businesses that are involved with the gun industry.


Just because YOU refuse to post those items, doesn't make them not facts.

So.....I assume you will either respond with another pop culture driven insult..............a finger.........change the subject.........or just ignore as you really have nothing to respond with.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
As I have pointed out multiple times, there will never be one law that will prevent all crime from ever happening. Stop trying to use that point, it's sad and idiotic.


i don't think anyone's suggesting that you said exactly that.



As I have pointed out multiple times, it was y'all that said that the background check law was not being enforced.


we have said that it is not ALWAYS being enforced. but it's not just this...it's other things that are not being enforced...the problem isn't that we need more laws, it's that we need the current laws to be enforced..this would have a net positive result, when it comes to instances of violence of ALL types.



Now, we have legislation that if made law would force the background check law to be enforced.


where? the thing you posted as your example does not do this at all....



all it does is reengages this measure so that it works and therefore eliminates people like I listed in the OP from getting a firearm legally.


how so?



The gun lobby is actually fighting against this (for some stupid reason) It's actually what you say you want to happen, background checks weeding out the people that shouldn't have anything to do with firearms from obtaining them legally like the people in the OP were able to do.


i think i've demonstrated that it's not the "gun lobby" doing this, it's the idiotic club mentality in the congress...you have yet to show us exactly how the "gun lobby" is directly influencing either legislation, or actual enforcement of existing laws.



But for some weird reason, you want to argue against it? Why? It's your valid point after all. I suspect that you actually understand this, because this thread has deteriorated into asinine trollish comments by the pro gun forum gang instead of actual discussion.


i'm sorry that you feel that posting facts, and pointing out the numerous inaccuracies of not only your arguments, but also of the information you present as evidence supporting those arguments, qualifies as "asinine trollish comments"



Yes, I am frustrated at this point. Because I have given you information after information, only to be ridiculed about my job, nit picked about crap that has nothing to do with the point at hand, when I present a new valid argument that does support my original point, it's buried in prolific postings about nonsense.


yes, you have presented materials, but they have been either incomplete, misrepresented, self-serving, inaccurate, or flat out untrue. now, i commented about the whole "lol, he's dumb because he works at a car wash" thing...i actually stuck up for you, which should say something not only about my character, but my sincerity with regard to having an actual conversation on the subject...remember that next time you wanna libel me, or try to imply i'm something i'm not.



Do you all understand that gun violence in this country is an actual problem? If you do, do you understand that there are people that are working against trying to alleviate those problems while at the same time trying to not infringe on your right to keep and bear arms?


yes, we have MANY problems in this country....violence is one of them, and "gun violence" is a subset of that..it is not the massive epidemic you seem to think it is. and yes, there are people working against it...they're the partisan club morons that make up our gloriously dysfunctional federal government bureaucracy..



But instead, your frustrating paranoia only leads me to conclude that you don't mind all the actual gun violence that is entirely preventable in this country. That in fact, you encourage it, welcome it, and celebrate it.


what paranoia? just because we disagree with your specific, interpretive brand of "understanding" of how things ought to work, does not mean we are ok with people dying...i really wish you'd stop misrepresenting everyone here, just because they don't agree with you.



Otherwise, any sane person would actually want to do something constructive about it. Like enforce background check laws that may prevent people who should not have a firearm from obtaining a firearm legally.


we ARE sane, and we DO want this....and there are already laws on the books for it....making ANOTHER law isn't going to magically cause the law to be enforced, because the enforcers are still lazy, and can't be bothered...



I get it, your a forum gang, it's your task on this website to completely disrupt topics that go against your pre-conceived ideology, any thread that pops up that is even slightly critical of the pervasive gun culture in America you descend upon like wolves hunting for the kill.


we're not a gang.....we're individual, like-minded posters who prefer to deal in facts, and reality, rather than idealistic, pie in the sky notions, like the one that says that redundant laws mean less crime...you can be critical all you want...it's when you start suggesting things that infringe upon a right that the citizens of the country have had since it's inception, that's when you start to get some heated remarks....especially given the amount of infringement we're already enduring at the hands of the very federal government who's JOB it is to PROTECT, PRESERVE, and UPHOLD that right... can you blame people for being upset?

cont. next post.
edit on 7-31-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I know im one that has admitted my mistakes more than once on this site

Yiu still didnt spend 5 min googling yiur own ignorance before spouting it as fact
Now

Back on topic


Eta ya know maybe this is the topic

A man spouts nonsense that can be fact checked by a five min google search yet

Instead of apologizing they dig in their heels for fear of hurting their own pride

Maybe...

a reply to: MrCynic

edit on pm720143102America/ChicagoThu, 31 Jul 2014 14:56:51 -0500_7000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)
edit on pm720143103America/ChicagoThu, 31 Jul 2014 15:05:13 -0500_7000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
cont. from last



But this is an important issue in our society, and the more mass shootings that occur by people who are able to obtain a firearm legally in this country the more the public is going to want to do something to end the cycle of violence, and eventually they are going to see through your propaganda campaign and see that maybe (and I hope it doesn't happen) but maybe, we should repeal the 2nd Amendment.


what propaganda?

the only propaganda is the crap being spewed by the federal government, their propaganda wing(the MSM), and their corporate masters...



I understand the need for the 2nd Amendment, I really do, a person has the right to defend themselves. However, I'm not arguing about people defending themselves, I am arguing that some people should not ever have had access to firearms because either their mental illness or their criminal background predisposes them to violence.


i'm glad you understand the need for this right.....the problem is that you're not understanding that you can't effectively combat the problem you're talking about, without either outright infringing on people who don't deserve it, or giving the corrupt, dysfunctional federal government a tool to enact a de facto ban on all guns...you mean well, but the people who would be given the power, do not...



Sure, maybe some state laws are a little over the top, like "butcherguy's New Jersey law" that apparently getting caught with a hollow point bullet rolling haphazardly around the floorboards will get you a bullet in the back of the head by a NJ cop. (not really sure of the veracity of that law, pretty sure that violates quite a few legal precedents not to mention the bill of rights) But butcherguy is convinced of it none the less. (see paranoia above)


c'mon man, you're being intellectually dishonest....that's NOT what he said, and you damn-well know it....



Y'all say we need to enforce the laws on the books, I agree, but the aren't being enforced, and by the Obama administration of all people. Hell, if FOX News and y'all are to be believed, Obama and Holder are out to personally take every gun out of every person's hand in the country, but it doesn't jive with the reality that people who shouldn't have been given access to a gun at all, are able to obtain them legally, which makes the Obama administration the single best friend of the pro gun crowd in decades in the white house.


how are they a friend to the pro-gun lobby by not enforcing the law? us pro-gun folks don't want that.....we believe in responsible ownership and operation of firearms by responsible people.....we don't want wingnuts shooting up schools, what the hell is wrong with you?



So, go ahead, troll on pro gun forum gang, troll on, but the point is the same, you want background checks, there is a bill to do just that, and instead of fighting against it, do yourselves a favor and try the opposite approach, and maybe we can reduce the amount, severity, and frequency of these mass shootings.


nobody's trolling but you, man.... we want background checks...background checks are already a requirement....your bill does nothing... try again.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus

Did you bother to read the bill? It's not that long, and it touches on all the key points that y'all want and this country needs. Without banning any gun, or infringing on the rights of law abiding sane gun owners.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

to be honest, no.

i didn't read the whole thing, because it IS too long, too annoyingly, frustratingly complicated, insofar as it being overly convoluted, and incredibly tedious to read....i don't have the time, or the patience to sift through all the nonsense or jargon....

additionally, did you miss the part where it hasn't been voted on yet? did you also miss the bit where they're quibbling over amendments, and screwing each other over for their respective clubs?

the congress is behaving like a kindergarten class..



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
Did you bother to read the bill? It's not that long, and it touches on all the key points that y'all want and this country needs. Without banning any gun, or infringing on the rights of law abiding sane gun owners.


What special juju is in that bill that was not in the original bills that will now compel law enforcement to do their jobs that they have been neglecting from the previously passed bills?

edit on 31-7-2014 by AugustusMasonicus because: Bring back the Limelight



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What special Juju you ask??????????????/


The "new bill" smell will compel ALL to adhere to it.............until that new smell wears off and then a newer bill will be needed.........to enforce that new bill that was to enforce the old bill that enforced the older bill.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus

Then how can you know to argue against it? I've already emailed my congressmen to support it, I know, that doesn't mean much, but it's our civic duty.

I think that everyone in this thread should read it.

It's that important.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
The "new bill" smell will compel ALL to adhere to it.............until that new smell wears off and then a newer bill will be needed.........to enforce that new bill that was to enforce the old bill that enforced the older bill.


I see. That actually now makes sense to me.

Oh, by the way, I fell and hit my head a minute ago. Hard.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

who said i'm arguing against it?

...aside from you, that is..
edit on 7-31-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It actually is kinda like that. But, in law, sometimes that is what has to be done.

Y'all keep saying enforce the laws already on the books, this bill says the same thing.

Read it, it's online so you can, it's not like you don't have an excuse right?

Maybe, just maybe, you'll find that even though the gun lobby is against it, you might agree with it.

And, if you don't, you will at least have a better reason why then "boo hoo, another gun law that I haven't given enough of a crap about to bother reading to actually make an informed decision, I'm gonna be against it, because I'm a lazy illiterate redneck who just wants to shoot my guns."





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join