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.

 

Dems stage sit-in on House floor to push for gun vote

page: 16
62
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 10:42 PM
link   
As a gun-owning Independent - I fully support the Democrats in this. Screw the gun lobby and their political extortion. Our representatives don't #ing work for them, they work for us. It's past time to use the legislative process to pass common-sense gun laws. Moments of silence don't do jack #. Thoughts and prayers are fleeting.

I'm #ing sick of grid-lock in Congress. Bring a no-fly/no-buy bill, a gun show loophole bill - at a minimum - t o the floor for a vote.




posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

Well the gun lobby does have about 4 million members so we are not talking about Monsanto here.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

Even if it violates the constitutional protections of every single American citizen? Have you read the bill with the proposed amendments? Because that is exactly what you are asking for here. To me, violating our Constitution is NOT common sense.


+2 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Look, the Congress needs to VOTE. Do something, push some legislation out and let it go to the Supremes if it's controversial/contentious. This business of each party acting as obstructionist to the other is bull#. We vote them in to get stuff done, not dawdle, jack around, grandstand or politicize. We have three branches to check each other but what's happening is that the President is acting outside of his authority with Executive Orders and the Congress is manipulating their role through gerry-mandering and procedural shenanigans. So nothing gets done or it's a break-even.

It's like when a football team persistently runs the damn ball straight up the middle for no damn yards. Coaches that do that get fired.

Congress needs to move the ball down the field, no matter the issue, or go home. # or get off the pot. Either pass some legislation on key issues, such as guns, or drop the issues and move on.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:02 PM
link   
If you support the idea of the no-fly no-buy bill then you support the death of due process, full stop end of discussion. This whole notion of "common-sense gun control" should be more accurately branded incremental disarmament instead because that is what it all boils down to. Gun owners have been repeatedly browbeat into "making compromises" except we never get a single damn thing back. We still have the NFA, the Hughes Amendment and the 922r nonsense. We have bent over freaking backwards to cater to the reactionary left to keep the peace but still they want more.

A question to all you federal loyalists: do you support mandatory backdoor in all software and a ban on the private possession/use of encryption software that doesn't have the aforementioned backdoor?

And as for the so-called gun owners who support this crap I urge you to sell what guns you have, you clearly lack the good judgement and understanding to possess deadly weapons.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare




I'm #ing sick of grid-lock in Congress. Bring a no-fly/no-buy bill, a gun show loophole bill - at a minimum - t o the floor for a vo


Name a single mass shooter that used the 'gun show loophole?



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

So you support passing legislation that you KNOW is unconstitutional just to "do something"? How myopic and selfish of you. WE are all, all United States citizens, in this fight together. And I for one do NOT think that violating our constitution for the appearance of doing work, or the illusion of some form of pseudo security is the correct and thoughtful course of action.

Impatience will get us all killed....every time.


+5 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Helig

Hey guy, I own guns for protection and hunting. I don't get off on guns or measure my self-worth by gun ownership, Additionally, I'm not #ing scared of the gubbint grabbing my guns - because I'm not doing anything wrong. If I end up on some no-fly list or a watch list, I'll go through the process to get off the list.

I'm not naive enough to think that this is all that is needed. I think whatever investigative process the FBI or ATF or whomever uses is jacked up and needs parameters.


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

No, the test of constitutionality is decided by the third branch of Government.


+6 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I can't. But it doesn't matter and I don't care. ANY dumbass loopholes should be closed. What #ing sense does it make for a buyer to be exempt from a background check at a gun show but not a gun store?



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare
Perhaps you need to watch this video...I guarantee it is worth the time to hear the responses from the DHS representative. Then you will see how completely cluster'd this is already before advocating making it worse by passing unconstitutional laws. How about we fix those issues first? That effort is worth the time and taxpayer money.




edit on 6/22/2016 by Krakatoa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: BLee8127
a reply to: DBCowboy

Oh look at me I use hashtag's because I'm cool.


#Yes

#YesIam



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

When you have a list that requires ZERO due process to be placed on it, then link that to stripping the rights from a citizen. That equates to stripping the rights without due process. That, my friend, is unconstitutional....period, full stop.

Have you read them? I am guessing the answer is no. But, you just want something done, and screw everyone in the process. Sorry, not me. Do it legally or do nothing.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

You didn't seriously use noble and us government in the same context, on purpose, right?
best laugh I had all week. Thanks!

edit on 01-14-2016 by Natas0114 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

You do know that Marteen passed a background check, and security check, and traveled to Saudi Arabia on multiple occasions.




I can't. But it doesn't matter and I don't care


I already knew this.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

Please explain this "loophole" to me as you understand it? I would like to know what your thoughts are before we discuss that further.


+4 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Internet 101. I didn't advocate passing unconstitutional laws, but that was cute. I said if something is vulnerable, the SC would decide. The difference between you and I is that I have a reasonable expectation that 535 members of Congress won't collective pass something that is abjectly unconstitutional. But, if they do, that's what the SC is for. And Elections.

What shouldn't happen though is letting fear decide our fate. This country wasn't founded on cowardice or narrow-mindedness. It was founded on high-minded ideals, forward thinking and balls of steel.


+4 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

As I said, the FBI process is screwed and needs addressing as well. But if your car has a flat tire and a dead battery, you fix both. Fixing just one won't get you anywhere.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

I agree with the second half of this post. But, it is in direct contradiction to the first part of your post. Which are you in favor of? Not succumbing to the fear and hastily passing bad legislation, or allowing bad legislation to pass and wait for someones rights to be stripped before having it addressed.

That is like agreeing to sell a car you know has bad brakes, but will deal with it later in court if someone dies.

Pick a side...you cannot have it both ways.



posted on Jun, 22 2016 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JetBlackStare

And you don't drive it hoping you will fix it later if you get in an accident either.



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join