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.

 

U.S. Senate Ready to Vote on Gun Bans

page: 5
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Gryphon66

You sure about that ?

Considering our entire LEGAL system is predicated on the presumption of innocence until PROVEN GUILTY in courts of law.

The background check has that backasswards.

GUILTY until proven innocent.

And those SNIP are actually voting?

The people that are pushing that nonsense need to be tried for treason.


This is absurd. A background check investigates what someone has done. If they are convicted felons, for example.

You seem lost in your own rhetoric. I think you're trying to argue against the terrorist watch list or maybe the no-fly list.

Not background checks.




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Nope. Constitutional amendments don't work that way and its a much different process.

This is just an amendment to a proposed bill in Congress. They tack on crap like this to bills all the time. House Resolution 2578, for instance, currently has nearly 200 proposed amendments. Some will pass, some won't.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The courts and the Constitution are two different arguments. The courts have already demonstrated that they ultimately don't give a flip about the Constitution. That said, holding to only the Constitutionality of the law, Congress is ONLY authorized by the Constitution to control transactions that occur across state lines. Private party sales and gun show sales involving people from the same state are not Constitutionally ANY business of Washington DC. Any legislation that attempts to authorize background checks for private, in-state transactions are Unconstitutional... same is true of this country's drug laws and the health insurance mandate.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: vor78

I mean amendments to the Constitution?



No. They know that wouldn't fly. They're just amendments to bills already in the process.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

And ?

The Eight amendment says something about cruel and unusual punishments.

A person doesn't forfeit their RIGHTS for the rest of their lives.

Only totalitarians believe that nonsense.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: vor78

Cool. As I recall you need 30 states to also sign off for a Constitutional amendment to pass. And quite frankly you ain't NEVER going to get that on guns.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: vor78

Cool. As I recall you need 30 states to also sign off for a Constitutional amendment to pass. And quite frankly you ain't NEVER going to get that on guns.



That's why they are pushing no fly no buy.

Declare everyone a terrorist, and do an end run about that stinking piece of paper.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Looks like the American People need to elect Senators and Representatives that actually vote more in line with their beliefs in November rather than those of the gun lobby.

Gallup Polls: Guns

55% think gun sales laws should be more strict
33% think laws should be kept as they are currently
11% think laws should be more lenient

86% are in favor of a national background checks using a database covering all 50 states

Etc.



So these are old polls eh.

And they are apparently national.

Why should Senators vote according to a national poll when their state may not agree?




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Well, I guess their just going to have to do another mass shooting event. School..check, church..check, gay bar..check. I guess a shopping mall is next? Maybe that will work.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: vor78

Cool. As I recall you need 30 states to also sign off for a Constitutional amendment to pass. And quite frankly you ain't NEVER going to get that on guns.

The Ratification process is about as loopy as the Electoral College picking the President. It takes 38 states, but once the process starts it usually gets approved ... even decades down the road if necessary.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Looks like the American People need to elect Senators and Representatives that actually vote more in line with their beliefs in November rather than those of the gun lobby.

Gallup Polls: Guns

55% think gun sales laws should be more strict
33% think laws should be kept as they are currently
11% think laws should be more lenient

86% are in favor of a national background checks using a database covering all 50 states

Etc.



That means absolutely jack snip.

Our rights are not subject to the whims of the mob.

They don't come from the state, and they don't come from each other.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sorry. Let me take it down a notch to un-friending them on Myspace.

Myspace? Does anyone still use that anymore? I thought that was a ghost town



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: vor78

Cool. As I recall you need 30 states to also sign off for a Constitutional amendment to pass. And quite frankly you ain't NEVER going to get that on guns.



For a Constitutional amendment, it actually requires three quarters of the states to ratify. So you actually need the legislatures of 38 states to sign off on it. As you say, that's not going to happen either to strengthen or weaken 2A anytime soon, if ever.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Uh, yah they are. That's why everyone Is talking about the Founding Fathers. Where else would they come from?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Terrorists and bad guys will get weapons. My concern is people who have mental issues that are not compatible with firearms, rage waiting to explode. Aren't the first two racking up the most kills.

50 killed in a club or 50 killed in a week in Chicago - the first is a bigger deal because it was by one person. Still 50 dead. Most of the second group of 50 has already been written off by society.

I can see the concern for what was an average person walking in with a weapon that can easily be used to fire 100s of rounds in a few minutes.

Question:

Do semi automatic rifles need to be legally allowed in public? Or should they be kept in homes and businesses?

I am in support of the right of citizens to possess firearms and to defend their homes.
edit on 6/20/2016 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/20/2016 by roadgravel because: wording was wrong



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Gryphon66

The courts and the Constitution are two different arguments. The courts have already demonstrated that they ultimately don't give a flip about the Constitution. That said, holding to only the Constitutionality of the law, Congress is ONLY authorized by the Constitution to control transactions that occur across state lines. Private party sales and gun show sales involving people from the same state are not Constitutionally ANY business of Washington DC. Any legislation that attempts to authorize background checks for private, in-state transactions are Unconstitutional... same is true of this country's drug laws and the health insurance mandate.


You make these nonsensical sweeping statements like "US Courts don't care about the Constitution."

Statements such as this are absurd and reflect the kind of absolutist thinking and beliefs you're exhibiting on this issue.

You're conflating your opinions on these issues to the only possible interpretation of the laws and the Constitution.

Small example of your mistaken beliefs:

There is a Federal excise tax on all sales of guns and ammunition in the United States. Article I, Section 8 EXPRESSLY gives the Congress the power to "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises" and in order to assure that the proper taxes are being paid on these sales there certainly can be a national database registration of all sales whether public or private, and there is no valid reason not to install a cooperative check at that same point to make certain that dangerous felons or the mentally ill (both noted in numerous State laws as unable to purchase firearms) are unable to do so

(Constitutional basis, Article 1 and Amendment 10 ... and interestingly, by extension, in same cases, Article IV, Section 1 "Full faith and credit")
edit on 20-6-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Looks like the American People need to elect Senators and Representatives that actually vote more in line with their beliefs in November rather than those of the gun lobby.

Gallup Polls: Guns

55% think gun sales laws should be more strict
33% think laws should be kept as they are currently
11% think laws should be more lenient

86% are in favor of a national background checks using a database covering all 50 states

Etc.



That means absolutely jack snip.

Our rights are not subject to the whims of the mob.

They don't come from the state, and they don't come from each other.



LOL, the "mob" ... it's so funny to follow your rhetorical devices, when you're in favor it's "the will of the American people" and when you aren't, it's "the mob."

For the millionth time, no one is taking away your rights to own your guns. No one is coming for your guns.

You probably will have to register in the future when you buy them though, and expect to be reviewed by a database in line with State laws.




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

None of those Idiots in the Senate can't seem to Understand how Any Bill they bring up in the attempt to Amend the Second Amendment will stop these things from happening Again .The Only way to stop Future Radical islamic inspired Terrorists Attacks is to screen ALL Muslims coming into the United States Thoroughly , and make Damn sure the American People are Protected from those who could Conceivably Pose a Threat . Also , Gun Free Zones should be Suspended in Areas where Possible Future Acts of Terror could be Perpetrated for the Sole Purpose of Killing innocent People . Americans DEMAND to Enforce their God Given RIGHT to Defend Themselves and their Loved Ones from the Animals that the Federal Government Can't or Won't seem to Control by themselves at this moment .
edit on 20-6-2016 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The fact that the same states and districts keep electing pro-2A representatives suggests that perhaps that's what those districts actually want. Likewise, the most likely reason that gun control consistently fails is because it tends to be heavily concentrated in fewer states and districts, creating a structural disadvantage in Congress.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: xuenchen

None of those Idiots in the Senate can't seem to Understand how Any Bill they bring up in the attempt to Amend the Second Amendment will stop these things from happening Again .The Only way to stop Future Radical islamic inspired Terrorists Attacks is to screen ALL Muslims coming into the United States Thoroughly , and make Damn sure the American People are Protected from those who could Conceivably Pose a Threat . Also , Gun Free Zones should be Suspended in Areas where Possible Future Acts of Terror could be Perpetrated for the Sole Purpose of Killing innocent People . Americans DEMAND to Enforce their God Given RIGHT to Defend Themselves and their Loved Ones from the Animals that the Federal Government Can't or Won't seem to Control by themselves at this moment .


You know, there is an Amendment before the Second, known as the First. You may want to read it sometime.

The government cannot act prejudicially against religions.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join