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.

 

Marquez Arming Jihadi Couple: Parody of US Arming ISIS?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
As officials continue to linger on what exact charges to press against the 29yo Mexican-American who allegedly armed the Muslim-American couple who allegedly shot 14 dead during a workplace Xmas party on Dec 2, and he already having waived his Miranda rights since at least as early as Dec 10th per CNN, for now one can only ponder what parts of California and Federal Gun laws will be put in the spotlight, concurrent with the saga of US Arming then disarning al Qaeda, ISIS, yada, yada.

isn't it already illegal to buy a gun and gift it to someone else due to underlying required background checks then registration?

So what about trading and or selling privately owned Guns in California or other states? What is the current legal process and perhaps I'd that process coming under fire in America's incremental disarmament of civilians?

With this San Bernardino massacre it already seems media & officials are making the most of it including having it showcase such multiple issues as Terrorism. Muslims, Jihadis, ISIS as well as conversion to Islam by other 'minorities', Gun control and now apparently private Gun trade/transfer.

Can a woman use her husband's Gun to defend her home from an intruder/attempted rapist, for a example; or is that now or soon to be a criminal act unless they Gun you're defending ur home with is yours and in your name?

edit on 17-12-2015 by Plantagenet because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Considering that Marquez was a convert himself, and so many people have a knee-jerk reaction to the implication that our government could be infiltrated or inhabited by Muslims at the very highest (even White House) levels, do you really want to make that comparison?



posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
religious indoctrination to IS

Legal ownership of weapons used in said attack

I don't see why Officials are taking WEEKS to make that connection

Sound like even more plot thickening is underway for biggest bang in both counterterrorism AND counter armament



That said, it does look like what they're working on is bridging a connection also to push for policing the internet more so as to prevent folks pledging allegiance to ISIS online (apparently=)

edit on 17-12-2015 by Plantagenet because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Plantagenet
isn't it already illegal to buy a gun and gift it to someone else due to underlying required background checks then registration?


I am not really a gun aficionado and don't know the laws. However, whether it is or isn't already illegal to do that, I don't see how it being illegal is going to stop terrorism. Terrorists are kind of infamous for not giving a damn about the legal repercussions of what they've done. They rarely make much effort to conceal their identity after the fact.

Unless they're proposing to do an exhaustive background check on the buyer and everyone the buyer knows before they let them buy a gun (Which is a creepy thought in and of itself), it seems like the only types of gun crimes this might stop would be the type where the person buying the weapons actually cares that they're committing a crime. Obviously, if they care, they wouldn't do it. If it's a friend of a terrorist who doesn't care, how is it going to stop the end result? All it will do is give the government a mechanism for prosecuting the buyer after the fact.


With this San Bernardino massacre it already seems media & officials are making the most of it including having it showcase such multiple issues as Terrorism. Muslims, Jihadis, ISIS as well as conversion to Islam by other 'minorities', Gun control and now apparently private Gun trade/transfer.


Yeah. That was my thought as well. I suspected all along that the special terror laws that initially appeared to be focused exclusively on a narrow range of people who were most likely to commit terrorist acts would gradually "drift" until they are basically being applied to everyone. IOW, the original laws were the proverbial foot in the door. Now that stuff like this seems to be happening routinely, they have more excuses to expand it into areas they never mentioned before.
edit on 17-12-2015 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
The three also conspired to set up base on a highway with no exits. One would drop pipe bombs aND the other on a hill taking out first responders with the Ak.


www.justice.gov...





top topics
 
2

log in

join