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.
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: DBCowboy
Question - Is their ANY Progressive Liberal Alive in America Today who Believes in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ? If so , how can they Rationalize their Political Beliefs with the Reality of the Freedoms they Now possess because of them ?
originally posted by: Wayfarer
originally posted by: Lumenari
originally posted by: Wayfarer
This article seems really disingenuous, full of vagaries and appeals to base emotion. How is what she is proposing (if she actually is proposing such a thing) bad in the case of mentally unstable or certifiably violent people not possessing firearms?
You seem to forget that they pass a bill with vague wording (Mentally unstable, who would vote against that?) and then expand the list of what mentally unstable is.
For instance, let's just make conservatives mentally unstable. After the bill passes.
This is EXACTLY what they do. By they, I mean progressives. And as for the Republican that co-sponsored, plenty of Progressive Republicans out there. McCain is a poster child for that particular type. As was Bush. As is McConnell.
What I remember is that I was deemed a domestic terrorist by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2007 because.. I voted for Ron Paul in the primary.
SoOo... not even a slippery slope here, it's just that the typical voter doesn't bother to think things through to the logical conclusion.
No thanks to anything resembling this bill. Only an idiot or a progressive pushing an agenda would even think about it.
It wasn't the bills wording I was arguing was vague, but rather the article on it in the OP. As I've said repeatedly, nobody has seen the bill, so all this furor is over theoretical estimates.
A family who knows that someone in their family could be a danger to themselves or to others needs to have a tool that they can take that gun away.”
conservativedailypost.com...
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Wayfarer
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Wayfarer
originally posted by: DBCowboy
Would Dingle want to remove knives, sharp objects, cars, hammers, bats, clubs, large sticks from the person as well?
If not, then it's just a leftist gun-grab and anti-Constitutional to boot.
####ing douche-bag leftists.
A Republican is co-sponsoring the bill. What are you going to suggest next, that Dingle forced him to with her lizard mind rays...?
Douche-bag republicans are leftists also.
You play your partisan games.
They all suck.
You're the one playing partisan games (calling anyone, even those of the opposite party douchebag leftist).
Show me a douche-bag leftist that is for more freedoms, smaller government, free expression, secure borders, lower taxes and I'll apologize.
originally posted by: dragonridr
If you want to prevent some one from killing others there has to be some way you can hold those weopons until it's deemed safe to return them
Dingell, along with Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., was named co-chair of the bipartisan Working Group on Response to Parkland Shooting this week. The group is tasked with devising measures to curb gun violence.
Dingell introduced legislation last year prohibiting people who abused dating partners from purchasing or possessing firearms, and clarifying federal law to prohibit those convicted of stalking from legally purchasing a firearm.