Hypocrisy: List of 26 gun-owning Democrats who participated in anti-gun sit-in

a reply to: Deaf Alien

No they dont, they keep arming them and criminals wtf arent you paying attention to fast and furious and arming the "moderates?"

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well for starters we know people of bad intent are crossing borders all over the globe. Criminals like mayhem and money so one sells to another.

You act like a teenager. Whats the pay to sell out you're own people?

Could you possibly offer a more generic example? What "people of bad intent" what "borders are they crossing" where are they mixing it up "on the globe."

Criminals like mayhem and money? LOL. This is what you're offering as proof of a connection between Mexican Cartels and ISIS or Al-Qaeda?

Or is your argument that everyone (who thinks like you do) "just knows it to be true"? Do you understand the idea of arguing a point?

You don't get to say "and that's just the way it is because I say so."

Evidence please. And drop the silly personal comments.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Gryphon66

You used the term as an accusation, I just turned your finger back at you.

Second Amendment touchy are you,... that is what this is about.

Another zero content post.

Make something resembling an actual point, stop trying to make it about me rather than the topic, or be ignored.

For your ease of access, the topic is 26 members of Congress who participated in a protest to bring attention to what they feel are needed changes in gun control laws. This for some reason is hypocritical. Why?

Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

originally posted by: neo96
Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

So prove it.

That should be easy to find, right?

a reply to: Gryphon66

They participated in a demonstration regarding background checks and keeping terrorists from having guns.

After four NO votes in The Senate, the losers had a slumber party.

They had already lost at yet another effort... they just can
not accept that their attempts to subvert The Second Amendment
are not well thought of.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: neo96
Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

So prove it.

That should be easy to find, right?

That is about the most immature post I have seen in awhile.

I don't have to do anything.

Not here to spoon feed people.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Another interesting side note:

It appears that congressmen and women are able to possess firearms in their private offices, but any other area in the capitol building is a gun-free zone. Visitors are subject to inspection of their belongings and have to go through metal detectors.

If our Republican members of congress were so sincere about 2nd amendment rights and the folly of gun-free zones, it stands to reason that they would want to make the capitol's policies about firearms an example for the rest of the nation to follow.

But they haven't.

Isn't that real hypocrisy, instead of this lukewarm attempt to paint the gun-owning democrats as hypocrites?

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: neo96
Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

So prove it.

That should be easy to find, right?

That is about the most immature post I have seen in awhile.

I don't have to do anything.

Not here to spoon feed people.

Try reading some of your posts ... LOL.

No, you don't have to do anything.

You make false statements and can't back them up. Gotcha.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Gryphon66

Another interesting side note:

It appears that congressmen and women are able to possess firearms in their private offices, but any other area in the capitol building is a gun-free zone. Visitors are subject to inspection of their belongings and have to go through metal detectors.

If our Republican members of congress were so sincere about 2nd amendment rights and the folly of gun-free zones, it stands to reason that they would want to make the capitol's policies about firearms an example for the rest of the nation to follow.

But they haven't.

Isn't that real hypocrisy, instead of this lukewarm attempt to paint the gun-owning democrats as hypocrites?

Yeah, I was doing some research on the question (because I knew that the claimant wouldn't bother).

They can have them in their offices. They can't take them into chambers. Notably, the public can't have weapons ANYWHERE on the Capitol grounds.

As you're saying, I wonder why some are hypocritical on that issue. Free and open carry is a Constitutional right, right?

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Gryphon66

They participated in a demonstration regarding background checks and keeping terrorists from having guns.

After four NO votes in The Senate, the losers had a slumber party.

They had already lost at yet another effort... they just can
not accept that their attempts to subvert The Second Amendment
are not well thought of.

Were the two Republican bills also "subverting the Second Amendment"? If so, how?

Indeed, how was anything voted on the day before (in the Senate) "subverting the 2nd?"

And what does what happened in the Senate have to do with what happened in the House ... you do realize it's two different chambers, and both can initiate legislation, right?

US Constitution, Article I has an outline of the process, if you're interested.

you understand this isn't about "owning guns", right ?

right ?

I heard they turned off the cameras when they started their 'sitting'.

Is that like when children don;t get their way, falling to the ground and having tantrums? Were they kicking the floor and crying, too?

Buwaaah, we want guns taken from Americans. Then they get up, wipe their noses and sign an order to ship tons more WMD to the Middle East.

Big smiles doing that I bet.

In all Socialist regimes, the political elite were above the laws they tried to enforce. This is why the far-left has become the epitome of hypocrisy in America.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: neo96
Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

So prove it.

That should be easy to find, right?

That is about the most immature post I have seen in awhile.

I don't have to do anything.

Not here to spoon feed people.

Try reading some of your posts ... LOL.

No, you don't have to do anything.

You make false statements and can't back them up. Gotcha.

That's a nice example of:

a reply to: neo96

Nope. Talking about your posts not you.

Hey, did you have anything on why it's hypocritical for 26 members of Congress to own guns and support background check legislation? Did you come up with anything to substantiate your claim that Members of Congress don't have to undergo background checks? Because, as you're fond of pointing out ... posting known falsehoods is against our site's rules.

originally posted by: neo96
Members of congress also wrote gun control laws, and the REQUIREMENTS for it.

And just like LEO is exempt from checks you can bet congressman are too.

No they aren't. Elected officials are not vetted to run and get elected. Supposedly, they are cleared to visit high security areas after they are elected. One person that was giving me my clearance remarked that I would be surprised at how many elected officials cannot get security clearances. Even law enforcement is not immune to the issue, either. An adjoining county has an elected sheriff that is also a convicted felon. He has to have a deputy travel along with him on any call he goes on for "security".

a reply to: intrptr



Exactly.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Gryphon66

YOu haven't said anything about a) the people on the list in the article, b) why they are hypocrites, c) how they are taking away Constitutional rights.

Why don't you start there?

No need to, that would be following your misdirection.



The Constitutional Amendment applies, regardless of names.

A variation on "I know you are but what am I" ... you say nothing, you make a baseless charge of misdirection.

Members of Congress own guns. They participated in a demonstration regarding background checks and keeping terrorists from having guns. To imply that contravenes the Second Amendment is ridiculous without any evidence.

But go on with the pointless ad hom.

So, by saying

...keeping terrorists from having guns...

are you saying that every name on each of those no-fly and terror watch lists are terrorists? Every single one? After all, if they are trying to keep terrorists from having guns, and the main point in these bills was to link the lists to determine rights of ownership, that must mean everyone on the list, in your mind, is an all-out terrorist.

Please clarify that for me, in case I misunderstood.

originally posted by: Konduit
In all Socialist regimes, the political elite were above the laws they tried to enforce. This is why the far-left has become the epitome of hypocrisy in America.

What laws is the "far-left" supposedly above?

Who is the "far-left" again?

Republicans are in control of Congress and split on the SCOTUS ... are you saying that's a "socialist regime"? Odd claim.

Again the hypocrisy charge. What is hypocritical about owning a gun and believing in background checks???