It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feinstine's new gun grab bill

page: 2
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7



anyone who is “appropriately suspected” of being a terrorist


10 Ridiculous Things That Make You a Terror Suspect



7 Days of Food: The Department of Justice and FBI considers you a terrorist threat if you have more than 7 days of food stored, as explained by Rand Paul on the Senate floor:




posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is the one from 2009, same song and track and it went no where.


I must ask those for those against a regulation like this.
Do you really have no issues with some one that is on the FBI watch list getting a fire arm?
Or is it only bad if they are not christian, former military or conservative


Until you are on the watch list for Googling around trying to find some information. Maybe you wish to educate yourself on terrorist groups and or activities and have no desire to join a group, you just want to read an article?

Same exact thing. Type in the wrong word on Google and BAM you are on a watch list.

How far can they take this ignorance?As far as they want because of ignorance and fear.

edit on 26-2-2015 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Taking your guns away is not going to go away until they take your guns away. Vote them out of office now or lose your #.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Outside of the partisan tripe; the title isn't that off. Given that many people on the watch list shouldn't actually be on it, basing such restrictions on legal ownership is just asinine and completely inaccurate -- even in terms of Government.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 01:58 AM
link   
What a joke.

Gang bangers and felons can get firearms with no problems.

Why do you think REAL Terrorists will have any problem with getting firearms.
The drug cartels in mexico have no problem getting full auto weapons and they are not from the US there from china.
chinese fishing boats pull in to mexician and other central ameraican ports all the time to refuel for repairs and resupply.
they bring in everything from full auto weapons, RPGs and hand grenades for big money from the drug cartels.
The drug cartels even get RPG rocket launchers and there not buying them from gun shows or gun store in the US.
And everyone here knows how easy drugs and illegals cross the border from mexico.

The US can not even stop illegal fireworks from coming in to the US from china.

that means that the bill is not to stop real Terrorists from getting Firearms and Explosives but to control Americans from getting Firearms and Explosives.
we all know Sen. Dianne Feinstein is a rabid anti gun nut but she is also hates mining in the US and would love to shutdown many mining companies and only leave companies run or owned by friends that donate to her reelection.

As for Explosives that is a real joke as any one can go on the internet and find out how to make there own from local products bought from stores.

The Terrorists run web sites telling just how to make Explosives from common household products.


edit on 27-2-2015 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 02:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

I like my coffee sweet but I wouldn't drink the best coffee on Earth if it will poison me LATER.
The Bill I speak of is the FCC FIasco.
I have a great DEAL of problems with the current administration
They could tell me WATER is wet and I would feel the need to make sure,DOUBLY so with the rabid Prog Feinistine.
Deasarmament is an incremental effort that must be checked at all possile venues of approach.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 02:41 AM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Guess it doesn't matter that this isn't only finestiens bill.

And don't see how the fcc thing is relevant here since a. It has nothing to do with it and b. The bill is right there to read.

It won't pass anyway so don't worry



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Very well any other nitpicking?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 03:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tusks
Before buying a gun from a licensed dealer, the dealers must first contact the FBI for a criminal background check of the buyer on the National Instant Criminal Background System (NICS). Why would a suspected terrorist not be on the computer?


Why would a terrorist even buy a gun from a legal dealer? Goes back to the idea that a criminal does not follow the law anyway and these laws are not for getting real criminals and terrorist anyway.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
Here is a new gun grab.
This time naming "SUSPECTED" terrorists as people the Attorney General can bar from purchasing firearms,without clearly defining the legality of the term and giving the choice to a politically manipulatable office.
Don't these morons EVER get it?

www.theblaze.com...



Yea they get it an don't care. They are constantly tossing up unconstitutional road blocks like this hoping that we will "get it" someday.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7
So anyone that wants to point out that it is not a gun grab is now an idiot?

Do you want a civil discussion or just berate those that don't agree?

Also, this is not just Feinstine's bill.

The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act was introduced this week by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.).



Yea it may not be a gun grab but it is very unconstitutional. Why don't they profile american Muslim centers that have been known to recruit for jihad and apply similar restriction without any evidence of crime?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
I must ask those for those against a regulation like this.
Do you really have no issues with some one that is on the FBI watch list getting a fire arm?
Or is it only bad if they are not christian, former military or conservative


I don't like people having their rights stripped without due process, regardless of who they are.
Same goes for the aircraft watch list. If the FBI knows someone is a terrorist, they should charge them, and then they can get banned from flying upon conviction. Or they can bring their case to a judge.

Question for thought: what if this was about voting rights, and people who were believed to be terrorists by the appropriate government agencies could have their right to vote stripped? Would that be OK?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Feinstine is like herpes and never goes away, just into hiding, much like astroturf Pelosi, and every other politician on the planet. They do more to endanger innocent people everyday than Isis/Isl/Is could ever do.

edit on 10-04-08 by Beach Bum because: Needed more words.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Perhaps the idiot Diane Feinstein should concentrate on prosecuting Sen. Leland Yee for arms trafficking and bribery? Kind of funny how the main stream media has since buried that story. Yeah, Sen. Yee is a good ally of Diane's, they both have fought hard for gun control in California.

Sen. Yee fought so hard that according to the FBI, he was caught by an undercover agent trafficking automatic firearms, including shoulder fired missiles, from a Muslim extremist group in the Philippines, then into the United States if you can believe such audacity. These hypocritical liars are trying to disarm Americans, while arming criminals, or possible future enemies of the United States Government.

How anyone can believe anything that comes out of one of these mentally deranged, leftist lunatics mouths is beyond me. I mean, you can't make this stuff up, these bottom feeders are the lowest of the low. Why doesn't the imbecile Feinstein, or whatever gun grabbing hypocrite liar for that matter, concern herself with the $500,000 to $2.5 million dollars worth of weapons that Sen. Yee was trying to smuggle into America?

I wonder if this puke bag Yee was working for the Chinese? Well we all know that Diane and her husband certainly do a lot of business with our Mandarin friends overseas. What is going on with this case, why have we not heard anything about it? My guess is there are a lot of back door hand jobs going on in order to cover up this story. ~$heopleNation

Welcome To The Sheople Nation
edit on 27-2-2015 by SheopleNation because: TypO



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Like this garbage...www.gunnews.com...



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80

Guess it doesn't matter that this isn't only finestiens bill.


Well you guessed right. What does it matter anyway, anyone can go and read it? It was introduced by Feinstein and the RHINO operative Peter King, so what?


It won't pass anyway so don't worry


You're probably correct, because “appropriately suspected” leaves a lot of wiggle room for political motivated scum bags to abuse. ~$heopleNation



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: xuenchen

Where are the idiots who are going to say "IT'S ONLY THE ONES ON THE LIST..." to deflect I wonder?
Gettin LAZY aren't they?


well, you seem to want it so.
...
it's only the ones on the list



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Beach Bum
Feinstine is like herpes and never goes away, just into hiding, much like astroturf Pelosi, and every other politician on the planet. They do more to endanger innocent people everyday than Isis/Isl/Is could ever do.


Yea shes back. Cant get over the fact that 2nd amendment protectors have so dearly made her pay over the years. She has been getting non stop "fan" mail for years over her position. Most politicians can do something stupid and then move on and time forgets. But not with this. She and Boxer have for decades been poster gals for blithering stupidity and cant live it down.

And by the way......this new move just shows up what she really felt all along and what she feels about gun owners, the constitution, the patriots, her sweet candy azz. She demonstrate her fear that she may be held accountable, her and her ilk, by an armed uprising someday.....and that nagging itch that tells her she may have it coming.
edit on 28-2-2015 by Logarock because: n



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
What part of "innocent until proven guilty" do these people not understand? That is supposed to be the guiding principle of our judicial system.



Yep, these Liberals don't want us interrogating terrorist 'suspects' at Guantanamo Bay because it would violate their rights and they have not been found guilty of crimes, but in the same breath this bat # crazy senile old woman wants to ban suspects from exercising a fundamental right.

On the surface this does not sound bad. If someone is a suspected terrorist, we think a dude who immigrated here from Yemen and all of a sudden wants to learn how to fly planes. However anyone with a brain stem would know that is not where this would be applied. Especially when the SPLC just put Ben Carson on the 'extremist' list. Dr. Ben Carson? Really? the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at a nationally renowned hospital is in the same group as ISIS (according to Obama) because he has Political beliefs he holds dear?

If Ben Carson can be put on the extremist list by the SPLC, it would be not but a stroke of a pen to put anyone who Fuhrer Obama dislikes on the list and take away their rights.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Well after a quick search my suggestion is that this isn't even new.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

I see the pro's and con's of this but do find it frightening that some one on a FBI watchlist would not prevent them from obtaining a firearm.


Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution disagrees vehemently with you.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


The Framers took this concept directly from the Magna Carta and expanded upon it by adding the concept of a man losing his rights without due process.

supreme.justia.com...


That the warrant now in question is legal process is not denied. It was issued in conformity with an act of Congress. But is it "due process of law?" The Constitution contains no description of those processes which it was intended to allow or forbid. It does not even declare what principles are to be applied to ascertain whether it be due process. It is manifest that it was not left to the legislative power to enact any process which might be devised. The article is a restraint on the legislative, as well as on the executive and judicial, powers of the government, and cannot be so construed as to leave Congress free to make any process "due process of law," by its mere will.


Dianne Feinstein is an idiot and has no business representing a legislative body when she so clearly has zero understanding of the documents governing and limiting her authority on said body.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join