Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

FBI Conducting 32 Gun Purchase Background Checks Per Minute Under Obama

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
reply to post by MysteriousHusky
 


The man thinks he is above us. So we will call him King Obama. He had a chance to be the best president that we've ever had and instead he does this bullsh*t.


what BS in specific?
What exactly...technically..do you object to?


The invasion of Libya comes to mind.

who needs congress anyway, certainly not Mr. Executive Order

This thread isn't about the UN sponsored no fly zone enforcement of Libya...this is about background checks for people wanting guns..you know.."this bull----" as you stated..this meaning this..not this meaning something else.

You stated it, just asking for clarification.




posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


Libyans were being killed, no question. Besides France and NATO supplied air support. Less controversial than fictional WMD's in Iraq. Also there hasn't been much backlash to the downfall of Gaddafi. The downfall of Mubarak on the other hand, has led people questioning the way the US treats their international allies.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
reply to post by MysteriousHusky
 


The man thinks he is above us. So we will call him King Obama. He had a chance to be the best president that we've ever had and instead he does this bullsh*t.


what BS in specific?
What exactly...technically..do you object to?


The invasion of Libya comes to mind.

who needs congress anyway, certainly not Mr. Executive Order

This thread isn't about the UN sponsored no fly zone enforcement of Libya...this is about background checks for people wanting guns..you know.."this bull----" as you stated..this meaning this..not this meaning something else.

You stated it, just asking for clarification.


Yeah, I'm not the guy that was directed at, But either way, we all know Obama is a UN lapdog..

The point is, 70+ million people attempting to purchase firearms, especially since Obama took office is staggering, and I believe that people don't have faith in the admin.
edit on 4/10/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by MysteriousHusky


king Obama


Firstly, cut the guy some slack. ]


No.

He's the President . He's also the same guy who pushes his own ideals on the American public at the cost of the American public. He gets No slack. The cult of personality comes with a price.


Agreed entirely. He also gets the credit or blame here, depending on one's side, based on something else. Bush was pro-gun. As Pro-gun as it came. He was accused...repeatedly...of being in the back pocket of the NRA in fact. You don't get much further than that. By contrast, Obama has been loud, clear and on the record for his very strong feelings against guns going many years beyond the time he first came to notice as a national candidate of anything.

Therefore, the contrast and most obvious source of the sea change in national policy direction is self evident. CT isn't new ..sadly...or unusual over the long term outlook. Tragic as that is to admit. The reaction is all that came as a radical departure. So....to the leader go the accolades ...or condemnation. I think my position is fairly well known without having to elaborate on which.


* By the way, I wonder how many people recognize your Avatar (Brando) in terms of which movie and which part of that movie it came from? Nice choice! (Kinda sad...kinda mad
...and a little pinch of Brando, wasn't it?)



Nice post. I couldn't agree more.

BTW, "The horror", wouldn't you agree?



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Does it really matter how many guns he "sells" when they are getting lists of all the people who want/buy guns? You know those lists are not going away.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Does it really matter how many guns he "sells" when they are getting lists of all the people who want/buy guns? You know those lists are not going away.


Good point, I've read quite a few things lately that point to there being some form of registry system, even if it means the public isn't aware.

But what do you do? I guess private sales are still always an option.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 





If the conspiracy was that the Obama admin wanted to enforce existing laws, then sure..but not much of a conspiracy, is it...nor is it some dark looming shot across the bow. the NRAs biggest line has always been we don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones on the books now...so, ok..the ones on the books are being enforced.. whats the issue?


I know right, I'm confused as to what the problem is, the background check has been around for awhile, if they are actually processing that many, doesn't that signify that they are at least trying to enforce the laws already in place?

Maybe I misread the title and quote.

"FBI Conducting 32 Gun Purchase Background Checks Per Minute Under Obama"

How many were they conducting before under previous governments?

Better yet, take careful note of the fact that it doesn't mention an increase in refusals, so...... What the heck is the conspiracy?

Maybe the deeper conspiracy is.... They know the majority of people want better control, not bans.. so maybe the name of the game is to Alex Jones it up a bit (i think i just invented that term, feel free to use it)

"Alex Jones it up" definition: To exaggerate or completely fabricate reasons for people to become paranoid in an effort to sell something or to work as a means to an end.

Example.

The Obama administration is "Alex Jones'ing it up a bit" by placing stories and articles suggesting they are ready to come grab your guns as they ban them all, in an effort to :
a) promote economic growth
b) create the very fringe radical dangerous element they claim to need stricter gun control to protect us from.

You can only listen to so much propaganda about how "they're cummin fer yer gunzz" and stockpile so much ammo before something goes wrong. Honestly, all it takes is a few nutjobs to make everyone look foolish, but it won't matter cause it will work. It will only take a few incidents to get more and more people willing to pass control measures that won't work.

32 Gun Purchase Background Checks Per Minute. That's a good thing. Sure, someone will tell me they have a right to own a gun and no one else has a right to know. Forget that pal, you don't, and only an idiot would suggest something as silly. Sure, you have every right to own a gun as a RESPONSIBLE firearm owner. To ensure that, there has to be some regulation.

You need a license to drive. That's regulated, you have to actually pass a competency test before you can do it legally, once you do... GASP. the government slaps your photo on a little plastic card that you have to carry around incase someone asks for your "papers", damn commies. Then, GASP, they actually keep a record of what type of vehicle, down to the license plate (they provide) and track it, knowing who has what.

My god, someone must stop the tyranny.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Until they require background checks for private sales anyway. Which, imo, would be UnConstitutional and I would not obey such a "law".



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters

You need a license to drive. That's regulated, you have to actually pass a competency test before you can do it legally, once you do... GASP. the government slaps your photo on a little plastic card that you have to carry around incase someone asks for your "papers", damn commies. Then, GASP, they actually keep a record of what type of vehicle, down to the license plate (they provide) and track it, knowing who has what.

My god, someone must stop the tyranny.
The "right to drive is, as often claimed, only a "privilege". The RIGHT to keep and bare arms is enshrined in the Constitution and shall not be infringed.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 





The point is, 70+ million people attempting to purchase firearms, especially since Obama took office is staggering, and I believe that people don't have faith in the admin.


I'm sure that's true to some extent, but how much of that is related to the conservative media blathering on about them coming to kick in your door and take your grandfathers .22 from you? I think that plays into it a bit too.

I don't know, i see something troubling brewing, that's for certain. I just can't help but question if all of this is playing into their hands, you know? We all think of the government as inept, and when it comes to running the country in your best interests, they are wholly inept. But when it comes to the nefarious, well, they seem to be on the ball with that stuff.

nothing in politics happens by accident.

could all of this paranoia be part of the plan? I mean, it's creating an atmosphere of distrust, people are becoming alienated as "preppers" "conspiracy nutz" "gun crazies" etc etc, and regardless of how you and your loved ones operate, you know damn well there is a huge line of crazies, probably in their little mountain compound right now, just waiting to fire a few rounds at the ATF.

What spark will light the tinderbox? Is that the plan all along?

Look how fast people supported sweeping gun reform after a CT? what will it take to get everyone motivated in that direction?

Worse yet, and back to Alex Jones.... What exactly would it take before foreign troops are deployed in North America to quell civil unrest because of the sheer volume of guns in private hands? They've been training them for 30 something years for these exact scenarios...

Is this all a long con?



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
There is always the possibility that this is part of the grand master plan, but the question still remains... if it is their plan, how sure are they that it won't backfire? People don't believe that the UN could work it's way into America via Agenda 21 and Arms Treaties.

Perhaps they are banking on a civil war, so the UN can swoop in and be the saviors, as they claim to be when they pillage 3rd world countries.
edit on 4/10/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


Maybe it's time for a new UN, or a sister organization. One that doesn't have to shy away from injustice but whose private army, like that of Blackwater (aka Xe and Academi), can act immediately.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
reply to post by MysteriousHusky
 


The man thinks he is above us. So we will call him King Obama. He had a chance to be the best president that we've ever had and instead he does this bullsh*t.


what BS in specific?
What exactly...technically..do you object to?


The invasion of Libya comes to mind.

who needs congress anyway, certainly not Mr. Executive Order

This thread isn't about the UN sponsored no fly zone enforcement of Libya...this is about background checks for people wanting guns..you know.."this bull----" as you stated..this meaning this..not this meaning something else.

You stated it, just asking for clarification.


Yeah, I'm not the guy that was directed at, But either way, we all know Obama is a UN lapdog..

The point is, 70+ million people attempting to purchase firearms, especially since Obama took office is staggering, and I believe that people don't have faith in the admin.
edit on 4/10/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)

70 million people, or 70 million firearms (some people buy more than just one).
My sister got 2 rifles and is looking at a shotgun..and shes not overly political..she does like zombie games though (left4dead2 specifically) and got into the idea of guns by playing endless hours of that.

As far as Obama being a un lapdog...its a interesting perspective. of course if you live anywhere but the states, the phrase is that the UN is the US's lapdog...so I guess its all perspective. I don't like generalizing highly complex international policy into single words...the world is slightly more complex than that...but no matter, that's off topic anyhow.

the topic still remains, how is making sure background checks are done efficiently = tyranny. People buying a lot of guns based on pretend doom porn is nothing new. happens under every dem president, yet the only major policy changes and bans happens under republican presidents (see Nixon and Reagan). what can ya say...33% of the US are easily swayed by rumor and innuendo



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   

the topic still remains, how is making sure background checks are done efficiently = tyranny. People buying a lot of guns based on pretend doom porn is nothing new. happens under every dem president, yet the only major policy changes and bans happens under republican presidents (see Nixon and Reagan). what can ya say...33% of the US are easily swayed by rumor and innuendo


There is no problem with making background checks work efficiently. But, there is no reason Obama and his admin need to tout around children and pretend to cry about gun violence in America, then at the same time orders drone strikes that end up killing children.

Using the background check argument is just a way for them to soften the people up. They will never stop trying to get rid of guns, plain and simple.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7
there is no reason Obama and his admin need to tout around children and pretend to cry about gun violence in America, then at the same time orders drone strikes that end up killing children.

That's like saying we shouldn't help out starving people, because we bomb people that are also possibly starving in different lands.

invalid argument.

Anyhow, I think proper gun control measurements are required. its a designed deadly weapon...being a competent user whom doesn't have a past criminally violent history should be a requirement that even the most hyped up gun enthusiast should agree with. I am neutral about the subject overall, but I do agree that control must be part of the equasion.

In saying that, I also see logic in giving everyone above the age of 18 a state issued revolver..because yes, I do tend to buy into a armed civil society is a polite civil society. Personally I wouldn't want one, but I don't fear them..just not my thing (unless they are virtual..then I am mad max).



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by eXia7
there is no reason Obama and his admin need to tout around children and pretend to cry about gun violence in America, then at the same time orders drone strikes that end up killing children.

That's like saying we shouldn't help out starving people, because we bomb people that are also possibly starving in different lands.

invalid argument.


So it's okay to put a face on the tragedy that happens here at home, but we can ignore all of the other injustices being conducted by the US to others, just as long as it's not being shown to us on the TV, right?



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by eXia7
there is no reason Obama and his admin need to tout around children and pretend to cry about gun violence in America, then at the same time orders drone strikes that end up killing children.

That's like saying we shouldn't help out starving people, because we bomb people that are also possibly starving in different lands.

invalid argument.


So it's okay to put a face on the tragedy that happens here at home, but we can ignore all of the other injustices being conducted by the US to others, just as long as it's not being shown to us on the TV, right?

No, I am saying we can do 2 things at once. things aren't black and white, we don't have to choose either bombing or feeding sort of thing...we can do best to feed, and also try at the same time to lessen and eliminate bombing.

We are off topic.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


We're at a huge loss of money, he keeps on spending while telling us we need to cut back. I dont care for Obama's health care reform. I dont care for taking money from the people while almost every level of government gets pay raises. He even considers taking money from GI's education, unacceptable.
edit on 11-4-2013 by zonetripper2065 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I am confused? Is this thread about Libya, drones, background checks or Obamacare? Stay focused people! You are confusing issues!



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by eXia7
So people say that Obama is the greatest gun salesman yet, now we're up to almost 70.3 million background checks under king Obama. This tells me that Americans are firm in their stance against what this administration is trying to pull off. Now, we'll get the critics and nay-sayers that will just call us all paranoid conspiracy theorists.


If the conspiracy was that the Obama admin wanted to enforce existing laws, then sure..but not much of a conspiracy, is it...nor is it some dark looming shot across the bow.
the NRAs biggest line has always been we don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones on the books now...so, ok..the ones on the books are being enforced..
whats the issue?



Man you got to watch the "new law" guys when their are large numbers of laws already on the books. Besides they are clearly trying to cover new ground here with new laws. The conspiracy is to act like you can stop things by restricting the rights of the law abiding. By placing more of a load on the civil rights of the law abiding. This is who tyrants fear more than anything......the law abiding rising up in their indignation. Criminals will not risk life and fortune like good people shaking off the fetters of oppression.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join