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.

 

50 Senators Who helped the Orlando shooter get a gun

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


originally posted by: abe froman
How about the ONE President who gave Mexican drug cartels HUNDREDS ?

Seriously, ATS needs a policy to keep people from registering just to post political propaganda right before elections.

The sheer number of people that have joined with in the last few weeks and months that push a certain agenda are suspicious at best but really seem more like an infestation.



What about the tens of thousands that are being sold domestically here on the black market? Operation Fast & Furious was small potatoes.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Yup, and buying a firearm for someone else (Straw man purchase) is also, presently illegal as well, but doesn't stop it from happening anyways.

If people know the amount of illegal weapons floating around, it would truly be jaw-dropping.




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:30 AM
link   
2 Things......

Prohibition.....

The war on Drugs.....

Now tell me how well banning firearms is going to go?? You know, just judging by history.......



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: gps777
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Do you really think that a ban on weapons would stop people like him getting weapons to kill especially in the US?



Yes a ban on all weapons would. No more kitchen knives, no more household chemicals, nothing. If guns were banned from the U.S. how many guns could this psycho find? Umm, probably one out of the 500 million that are registered in the U.S. I presume. Lets just keep guns legal and ban ammunition unless you have a badge. I feel this is the trend people will want and then when it doesn;t solve anything there is no turning back.

After 9/11 why was there no call to outlaw commercial planes? Or outlaw skyscrapers that hold thousands of people? Why would cops need guns if the public was dissarmed? None of it makes sense, I don't make sense, so I leave my free speech to forums where my fmialy won't hate me.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Yea, um, I have no respect for those critters or anything, but they had no more to do with the deaths of those people than I did.

You are reaching. Overreaching.

My tax dollars pay their salaries, so I guess I killed those people.

Where does it end?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
How about the ONE President who gave Mexican drug cartels HUNDREDS ?

Seriously, ATS needs a policy to keep people from registering just to post political propaganda right before elections.

The sheer number of people that have joined with in the last few weeks and months that push a certain agenda are suspicious at best but really seem more like an infestation.



www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:48 AM
link   
a reply to: VivreLibre

So can we coin them BB's now?




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Don't be discouraged by Naysayers O.P , say your piece never mind flags & Stars, it's important that you put this out there, lurkers and folks unable participate are also viewing, and yes the pols need to be held to account, at the very least politically.
edit on 15-6-2016 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
How about the ONE President who gave Mexican drug cartels HUNDREDS ?

Which literally could translate to treason in the definition provided by the USA constitution.


Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.


Bolded part mine.

Like or hate Obama, he has literally met the criteria of treason.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 07:14 AM
link   
I would like to shake the hands of all damn 50 of them.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls
NAME me ONE law that has been vetoed that would have stopped this. Name it!!! PLEASE put it out there in black & white so we can see it.
Criminals DO NOT follow the law!!!!!

Gun Control = Victim Disarmament

How about we start going after the people that are breaking the law and leave the law abiding gun owners alone!



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 07:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Here Are The 50 Senators Who Voted Away The Lives Of 49 People In Pulse Nightclub




GOP senators had the chance to hinder the Pulse nightclub shooter in his AR-15 inquiries, but decided against a bill that would have prohibited the sale of assault rifles to people on federal watch lists, like the one Omar Mateen was on





These 50 senators have received $27 million from the NRA, leading them to vote against a bill to expand background checks after the San Bernardino terrorist attack. These 50 people have kept America in mortal danger for the sole purpose of lining their pockets.


Now they are reaping what they sow. If you voted against that bill, you should be held accountable. Every time there is a mass shooting the NRA makes a profit, they instill fear in gun owners that the government wants their guns.

How despicable is it that the GOP and the NRA make a profit of mass shootings? Won't reply tonight but may tomorrow or whenever. I have a life outside of ATS and there is telling when I will be back on.


This sounds like an attempt to share the blame for this event with someone besides the "nut job" who pulled the trigger.

Very much like Trump said about the President letting this family into the U S. What he did not account for was that the parents came into the country when Reagan was in office and the guy who did the shooting was born here;, actually in the same city as was Trump.

If one is to speak in generalities, then one should not try to make specific points as examples.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   
lol "Shredder of Souls" is a fitting name for a Hillary Shill! Go back to your hole with your vitriol!



posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

These 50 senators have received $27 million from the NRA, leading them to vote against a bill to expand background checks after the San Bernardino terrorist attack.


The San Bernadino TERRORIST used a STRAW BUYER.

Marteen pass the BACKGROUND CHECK ,and SECURITY screen for his work.

There are LIES,

And there are DAMN LIES.

ATS has a policy about posting KNOWINGLY FALSE INFORMATION.



posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 02:32 PM
link   


his AR-15 inquiries


Inquiries? I would have thought the issue would have been purchasing a firearm.

Also, he didn't use an AR-15. That just repeating buzz words.



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 06:30 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Without saying I supported it or not, last I checked, there was a different group of 47 senators...Democrats... who voted against a GOP alternative this week that also would have delayed the sale for 72 hours, during which time the government would be notified and have a chance to block it permanently with a court order. The fact is, the Democrats could have gotten most of what they wanted, but instead, have decided that its more important to play partisan games with the issue and engage in some political grandstanding on the floor of Congress. I guess you missed that part.

edit on 24-6-2016 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: vor78
That was nothing more than a publicity stunt.

The FBI removed him from the watch list so NONE of their bills would have changed anything!!! They want to grand stand and take away more gun rights, simple!

If they REALLY wanted to do something they would deal with WHY he was TWICE removed from a watch list.



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

What? You mean tens and thousands of tons of illegal drugs? I'm sure you're right, the Mexican cartels could absolutely add guns to there manifests when you let the government outlaw legal ones. We aren't stopping them from selling the one, so I'm pretty sure no one will stop them from selling the other, either, and China will be happy to manufacture guns just like they do now.



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Regardless of how those senators voted, this bill never would have stopped Omar in the first place for two reasons. It wasn't effective then and he wasn't on the FBI watch list at the time of incident. Sure he was on it for a year at one point, but he was taken off. Therefore suspicion had been cleared against him at the time.

This article is sensational BS. I agree something should be done, but making emotional appeals in the face of logic isn't the way to do it. Also, if you want my support for stopping people on the terrorist watch list from buying guns, then there needs to be some SERIOUS overhaul on how your name winds up on that list. I'm not ceding my right to due process away just because some people died in this country.



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   
I don't disagree that there need to be changes made to the "Terror Watchlist" and everything that depends on it (like the infamous "no fly" list.) Let's tell Congress to make that a priority when they get back; it's time to do some actual work for the People they represent. When that question is solved (and it should have been solved a long time ago) the question of whether we allow terror suspects to easily purchase weapons becomes a bit more clear.

I see no logical reason why every gun purchase in this country should not be a) subject to a background check on the purchaser and b) part of a national registration database.

Neither limit in any way the Second Amendment right to bear arms in defense of one's self, home and community.

To deprive someone of their Constitutional rights in this regard or in any area should be a concern of the greatest importance to us all. The Constitution is the basis of American freedom, and all of us, indeed, should safeguard our rights and privileges as if we were defending our lives.

The pertinent area of Federal law regarding firearms is found at 18 U.S. Code § 922 - Unlawful acts if you're not certain of the current statutes.



posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Fair question: How does a vote after an event prevent that event from happening before there was a vote?




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join