Orlando Families Plead With Obama

a reply to: Gryphon66

My personal opinion is that she was severely traumatized by the Harvey Milk and George Moscone assassinations. If you look up the video of her announcing their deaths, she is beyond being in a state of shock. I think her knee jerk reaction to that moment became a permanent state of mind imo.

a reply to: Krakatoa

No real issues with anything you're saying here. The Constitution should always have preeminent control over all laws and actions of our governments.

a reply to: Gryphon66

However, that doesn't change the fact that a system of universal background checks, probably at the Federal level, is a reasonable requirement to purchase firearms in the United States, nor is the restriction of purchases to those suspected of terrorism or other violent acts against the public an unreasonable move. Further, if we can correct the process of the "Terrorism Watch List" to reflect the requirements of due process, all the better.

I am not arguing against you. I just want to know how it will differ from what already exists?

Almost every office building, every public venue, demands an ID before you can enter. Anyone with the power or authority, if they choose to, they can randomly stop you, and make you prove you are, who you say you are. You have to "show your papers". You have to prove who you are if a cop doesn't like the way you look, or if he decided to, because the light on your bike went out.

It is almost impossible to purchase anything, or bank anywhere in the US, unless you have a card or a device with a chip. Almost all jobs require extensive background checks, and there are cameras everywhere, recording every time you scratch your ass, or pick your nose.

We have measures in place that are not being used for the reasons, or the people, they claim they were put in place for. The American citizen is the one that is being placed under the microscope. We are the ones that they seem to view as the enemy.

As for my garden variety diatribe, I will gladly retract it, if you, or anyone else can show me otherwise.

I agree that my criticism of the US government has become so common, and so expected, that most people no longer even hope for anything better.

I still have hope. No much, but a little. Not in the government, but in the people.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: Gryphon66

My personal opinion is that she was severely traumatized by the Harvey Milk and George Moscone assassinations. If you look up the video of her announcing their deaths, she is beyond being in a state of shock. I think her knee jerk reaction to that moment became a permanent state of mind imo.

From what I've just been reading, your analysis seems spot on. Interesting that her first reaction was to buy and carry a firearm.

Then the corresponding action is apparently to try to make all guns go away.

Yes, the Senator has some issues in this regard. Another reason for term limits.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: Gryphon66

Just to keep this in context ... this was an interview in 1995. The federal assault weapon ban that she authored passed in 1994. She was indeed referring to all guns, since her bill had already passed and she says she would have banned all guns if the votes had been there.

I find it almost as ridiculous a statement to make publicly as Pelosi's comment about the ACA.

The difference being that Feinstein is arguing against the Constitution of the United States; Pelosi was just ... kinda dumb.

Was?

Congratulations, that's the smallest nit-pick I've seen yet on ATS.

What's the problem?

I was agreeing with you and going one step more. Pelosi is vacant.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Except the firearms being wielded by the bodyguards that protect her. Those seem to be acceptable to her, since they are protecting HER. Screw the rest of the citizens who need to protect themselves I guess.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

And I'm not arguing against you. I'm not a big fan of gun legislation.

However, I think there needs to be a national standard for background checks and weapon registration.

I wouldn't mind seeing a national "Gun Toter's License" which carried at least as much training as the average Driver's Licence.

But, it's also not the biggest issue before us as a nation.

As long as we follow the requirements of the Constitution and act in ways that do the most for the public good and the least harm, I'm fine with it.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: Gryphon66

Just to keep this in context ... this was an interview in 1995. The federal assault weapon ban that she authored passed in 1994. She was indeed referring to all guns, since her bill had already passed and she says she would have banned all guns if the votes had been there.

I find it almost as ridiculous a statement to make publicly as Pelosi's comment about the ACA.

The difference being that Feinstein is arguing against the Constitution of the United States; Pelosi was just ... kinda dumb.

Was?

Congratulations, that's the smallest nit-pick I've seen yet on ATS.

What's the problem?

I was agreeing with you and going one step more. Pelosi is vacant.

AH! I beg your pardon. It's one of those rare instances where we agree. LOL

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: Gryphon66

Except the firearms being wielded by the bodyguards that protect her. Those seem to be acceptable to her, since they are protecting HER. Screw the rest of the citizens who need to protect themselves I guess.

Politicians are authoritarians. They crave power, not consistency.

(i.e. I agree with you.)

a reply to: Gryphon66

However, I think there needs to be a national standard for background checks and weapon registration.

Do we not already have federal standards in place?

I love the idea of a national license, if it would stop making American citizens criminals because they crossed a state line.

But, it's also not the biggest issue before us as a nation.

This is exactly the point. It is just another distraction.

Too many big, trigger, distractions. Simultaneously, and back, to back. It scares me.

I am starting to agree with those that believe that something wicked this way comes.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

What good are more regulations, when the store owners who suspects someone of being a little unhinged, calls the FBI and they dont even get a call back? Or when red flags are blowing around a fellow and he can still pass a psych evaluation, and vetting before being hired to a military connected security business. It seems to me they cant stop these idiots from slipping through the cracks, so adding more checks and balances isnt going to fix the problems.

If you see something, say something. Really, who is listening?

It makes me wonder how intelligent these people are, to think by banning these weapons, they will be unavailable. Is just plain stupid. You can buy anything you want if you have enough money. I bet even tanks and cruise missiles.

The President is correct that he can do nothing at this time frame without the aid of Congress to make it a law and to ensure that any and all laws will survive the court cases that may come around for such. Here is where we the people need to hound the legislative branch of the government to do something, beyond silence and prayers for victims.