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.

 

Democrats currently holding Filibuster to take away your gun rights

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity




They are hardly trying to take your guns either. They are putting controls in place. Sort of, like, you know, the kind of controls used when you, oh, say, can legally drive a car.


They didn't stop Lanza that guy who killed his mother.

They didn't stop Marteen that passed all their requirements even as a contractor for the STATE.

But hey 'filibuster' away, and keep pushing the same damn thing they have been for the last eight years, and last eight decades.




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanteGaland
Yes...Obama stood and talked and talked and refused to agree to a budget



Basically, yes.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
We need to pass more laws to make sure only criminals commit crimes.




Not even new laws, you just need to shut down loopholes for current laws.

Whats the point in even having fbi checks for firearm purchases, when state laws have loopholes that allow people to bypass the fbi checks?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: ~Lucidity

I understand that point. But once there is precedent it is easier to enact more restrictions. Does that not scare you at all?


No. If they actually came for our guns it would be a whole other story. And I think we'd find out, don't you?

There is an important distinction here.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

GODDAMMIT METAFUCHS your title is a bald-faced LIE.


A Democratic senator on Wednesday launched a filibuster to force a vote on gun control legislation three days after 49 people were killed at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida, in the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history.


Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy said he would remain on the Senate floor "until we get some signal, some sign that we can come together," as he also evoked the Newtown school shooting in his state in 2012. His plea came as presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said he would meet with the National Rifle Association about the terror watch list and gun purchases.



ABOUT THE TERROR WATCH LIST and allowing people who were once on it to BUY GUNS.
NO-FLY people are allowed to BUY GUNS.

THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE PUSHING

Not "taking away your guns." Jesus you people never stop with the lies, do you????

They want a consensus on SOME FORM of control over who is allowed to buy guns......
PERIOD.




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

There are no loopholes.

Because NO 'mass shooter' used them.

But hey Americans civil liberties really don't mean much to gunphobes.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: ~Lucidity




They are hardly trying to take your guns either. They are putting controls in place. Sort of, like, you know, the kind of controls used when you, oh, say, can legally drive a car.


They didn't stop Lanza that guy who killed his mother.

They didn't stop Marteen that passed all their requirements even as a contractor for the STATE.

But hey 'filibuster' away, and keep pushing the same damn thing they have been for the last eight years, and last eight decades.



What? Because something won't be perfect means we can't try to prevent more murders?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Your source is badly flawed the guy had more back ground checks done on him than I did, and I was cleared to work around Nukes.

I don't know the exact information.. but I believe he was not on a watch list when he purchased his weapons... so (assuming my knowledge is correct) how exactly would this have prevented Orlando?

The guy was investigated twice by the FBI, he was a licensed armed guard with a contracting company that handles several DHS contracts, he was probably investigated 4 times...

These are nothing more than placebo bs meant to show the sheep that follow the democrat team that they are doing something.

eta
the following is a general statement) DUE PROCESS people... you can be placed on a watch list/no flylist because someone thought you dressed funny.. and from everything I have read, unless your a 5 or 6 year old they are a pain in the butt to get off of...

Do you really want some red tape specialist for the Fed to decide which civil rights you keep?

FFS people use that thing on top of your shoulders for something more than a hat rack.



edit on 15-6-2016 by Irishhaf because: additional thought



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

By turning everyone that lives here in to criminals.

Guilty until proven innocent.

This is just beyond idiocy anymore.

The LAW says people can't go around shooting other people.

So make it tougher for 99 percent of the people that don't do anything to practice their RIGHT.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Is this true?


9-in-10 on terror watch list who sought guns were approved in 2015

Remember this? Our gun laws are so loose they don't use bombs here...they use what's readily available to them.

Seriously? Nothing should be done?



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Your source is badly flawed the guy had more back ground checks done on him than I did, and I was cleared to work around Nukes.

I don't know the exact information.. but I believe he was not on a watch list when he purchased his weapons... so (assuming my knowledge is correct) how exactly would this have prevented Orlando?

The guy was investigated twice by the FBI, he was a licensed armed guard with a contracting company that handles several DHS contracts, he was probably investigated 4 times...

These are nothing more than placebo bs meant to show the sheep that follow the democrat team that they are doing something.

eta
the following is a general statement) DUE PROCESS people... you can be placed on a watch list/no flylist because someone thought you dressed funny.. and from everything I have read, unless your a 5 or 6 year old they are a pain in the butt to get off of...

Do you really want some red tape specialist for the Fed to decide which civil rights you keep?

FFS people use that thing on top of your shoulders for something more than a hat rack.




In a thread of mine from a few years ago you all screeched about how hard it is to get off a watch list if you're really innocent. What you're referring to is a flaw in the narrative.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
a reply to: matafuchs

From the comments. If this is correct?


NO ONE CAN OR IS GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS FROM YOU. Do you even understand how amending the Constitution works? It would require several steps, most importantly a 3/4 majority vote in EVERY STATE. It's never going to happen, it's not realistic.


Nope

Article 5:


The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.


One of two things:

1) Three-fourths of the State legislatures must approve of the amendment
2) Three-fourths of the states must approve the amendment via ratifying conventions



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

The conversation is actually about having high-capacity magazines. Weapons that can fire 30 rounds per second are out of place in a civilian target-shooting, plinking, and hunting-for-food society.

It is far more realistic to attempt to control magazine size - gun makers already are able to "get around the bans" by tweaking their blueprints - and gun-owners are adept at retro-fitting their weapons to be mass-murdering machines.

MENTAL ILLNESS is the real problem.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Is it really all they want? I mean, because, it is really easy to get put on that no-fly list and then not be able to purchase a weapon if you would like based on your SECOND AMENDMENT right.

Once you start to classify it is easy to restrict. Felons cannot have guns. So, if you committed a dumb ass crime at 18 you should not be allowed to ever purchase a firearm. You see, that is NOT in the SECOND AMENDMENT but it is law.

First, it is the no-fly list. Then, it is anyone who has ever visited a mental health professional. Wait! That is already in the PPACA. Once you start to list people who cannot have something, circumventing the Bill of Rights, you are open to more and more of your rights being taken away.

Your rights were taken at the beginning of the 20th century. Progressives are almost winning.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Deep breaths. 1, 2, 3... breathe... 4, 5, 6...

Now, ask yourself: how exactly is the no-fly list determined? How is it built?

Answer, it is completely arbitrary and by executive fiat. There is zero judiciary or legislative input. Meaning anyone can be put on it.

So please reel in the all-caps in massive font and think it through, please.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs




Is it really all they want? I mean, because, it is really easy to get put on that no-fly list and then not be able to purchase a weapon if you would like based on your SECOND AMENDMENT right.


They don't care.

They don't care US congressman have been put on them, and not even 8 years ago they were crying how fascist they were under GW.

Equate a constitutional RIGHT to terrorism!

They have gone way past the Patriot Act with this crap.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. If only he knew he only had to go shoot up a night club to disarm the American public...

I guarantee you whatever gun control measures they try to pass won't touch the guns of their security details, or of the police, or of the criminals who are carrying illegally, or of our exports to other countries and our enemies.

Shame. Just shame.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Hey.

What current gun control laws did Omar violate?




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Irishhaf

The conversation is actually about having high-capacity magazines. Weapons that can fire 30 rounds per second are out of place in a civilian target-shooting, plinking, and hunting-for-food society.


You think an AR-15... a semi-automatic weapon (that means 1 trigger squeeze = 1 bullet) can fire 30 bullets in a second?

That is one itchy trigger finger!

There are fully automatic machine guns that can achieve a thousand rounds in a minute, bu they are (gasp) already illegal.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Don't work yourself into another episode.

How does this no-fly and watch list thing apply to the 2nd Amendment?

And how do we verify if anybody on those lists are already restricted because of convictions or mental issues?

Do the "Senator(s)" address those points?





top topics



 
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join