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.

 

Senate blocks deal on gun background checks

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I just finished watching Obama giving his speech on how 90% of America has been let down. The best part was the introduction of Obama, by Biden. Face all contorted with his fake alligator tears...even throwing his face into both hands at one point, slowly looking up, shaking his head sadly, wiping invisible tears as he motioned our POTUS to the podium. Then as Obama starts his "I can't tell you how disappointed I am" speech. Biden turns to talk to a person next to him, with big old smile on his face.

This dog and pony show over gun control is getting beyond sickening.

Des



edit on 17-4-2013 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Obama never saw a gun ban or restriction he didnt like.

I'm glad to see him disappointed and defeated.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 





I just finished watching Obama giving his speech on how 90% of America has been let down.


Let down?

How so considering not even 90% of people in this country even vote.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
So where did that 90% come from?



I don't doubt its a legitimate stat.

Its called lying with statistics. I'd guess that 90% of the public probably does support some form of a background check system on firearms purchases. I do. Does that mean I support this abomination they tried to pass in the Senate? Not so much. In fact, I think the current system is basically adequate. That's how the polling game is played and how they lie with a factual statistic. They ask a very broad question on background checks, intended to get a high percentage in their desired direction, and then they cite it as evidence of support of a specific proposal. Well, not so fast. Just because a person supports the general idea of a background check does not mean they support a specific proposal.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by vor78
 


Yeah it is like here: news.yahoo.com...


By a margin of 92 percent to 7 percent, voters supported background checks, the Quinnipiac University telephone poll showed.

In households with a gun,
91 percent were in favor, while 8 percent were opposed, Quinnipiac said.


news.yahoo.com...

In household with guns, not every household in America has a gun in it,. then people are telling me gun owners support making it tougher for themsevles to own a gun.

BS all the way around been in the majority of gun threads here and most gun owners are adamantly opposed to gun control legislation.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I agree, its BS. They're cooking the numbers and its blatantly obvious. They might have gotten away with the lie at 60-65%, but 90%+? LOL. They haven't met too many rural gun owners, apparently. Its like everything else in this gun grab...they're so blinded by ideology that they can't see how badly they're overreaching and how much of a backlash they're creating.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Havox
 
what they do not tell you is that is 90% of the people that they interview and go with what they ask about is1 tenth of the areas populaces,
say NY or DC or LA not a nation wide, if it is a nation wide it is by phone one person speaks for 100 or 1000.

I know, I have received them types of calls, and have asked what my opinion represents.

here are some of the Questions
Do you own or know some one that does ,
do you believe in the 2nd,
would you support a stronger back ground check,
are the laws in place ok with you or would you want more. ect ect ect

none of your biz there non NRA. only the NRA knows what I think, if they do not get there act together , ill not be re-upping my member ship this time, but they seem to be doing what they say they would for now.

Lets see how the rest of the bills go, Gun Ban no! mag ban no!,
this one back ground checks made stronger ... dead!
so too should the rest of the bills be.


edit on 17-4-2013 by bekod because: line edit



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Well Des, I guess the 90% were in those 57 states....

I had more to add but multiple White Screen time outs on my last posts has me at a loss for re-typing over again.

I guess we'll just count our wins for the moment and take stock. Like so much else, the war is far from over. We just won a battle, right?

edit on 17-4-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Loss Of Control

This is more a rejection of the Democrats' ill-chosen strategy of poisoning the well than background checks.

While it is apparently fashionable for the President to point fingers at others for his own shortcomings, when he and his surrogates choose to attack, insult and alienate large portions of the electorate in a transparent attempt to intimidate or shame them, the blame for what results rests entirely upon his shoulders -- whether he possesses the stature to admit it or not.

There are many Americans, myself included, who think there's a tremendous opportunity for improving the current dog's breakfast of confusing and often conflicting gun laws currently in force and bringing some consistency and sensibility to them on a nationwide basis.

Unfortunately, in an atmosphere deliberately calculated to divide and polarize, that opportunity is being squandered.

The Democrats can and do blame the Republicans, as they are wont to do for literally everything, but if the goal is to make meaningful changes rather than throw unseemly temper tantrums and drive away potential support, they would be far better served to take a good, long look in the mirror.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


Think they are indeed mad that the flouride isn't working like it use to.

Second agrees



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
i been getting a lot of error messages here on ats??? just got one trying to reply to this thread, any one else????


ok back to the topic, thats great that they blocked it. now what does that mean for state laws? like in colorados magazine ban and where you cant shoot some one else's gun with out a back ground check. also you cant pass down your guns to your kids and so on.

i was just wondering if it will effect any of these state law's or if theye are all on there own?



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NISMOALTI
 


This will not affect state legislation.

Only the people of those states can change things.

If not, then they can either move or live with it.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
I feel sorry for Obama.

Any civilized nations should have background checks on everyone when they want to buy a gun.
Its common sense, anyone arguing here that background checks are wrong are completely deluding themselves.

If you want to purchase a tool that can murder multiple people in seconds, then you need to have background checks. Full stop, bottom line.. how on earth can decent and smart people not get this concept?

if your so addicted to your ego's needing firearms.. ok, but someone needs to make sure the wrong people are getting their hands on these weapons.

Also, Obama didnt seem over the top / livid as some are making him out to be.

... America, jesus christ cant you get anything right when it comes to common sense and peace?

Have you not figured out why the world hates you and why your children and performing mass massacres ?

your morale decay is on show for the entire world to see and I understand why another race wouldnt want to come to Earth and communicate with our free world leaders.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 





Any civilized nations should have background checks on everyone when they want to buy a gun.


A civilized nation knows that background checks, and other asinine legislation put forth in the last 5 months are nothing but civiil liberty violations, that the very same people would abhore if the issue was something else.

A civilized nation also knows that behavior can not be legislated.

Only common sense.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


really?

man walks into a shop asking for a semi automatic rifle. No background checks performed, he now walks out with a weapons capable of killing dozens in a minute.

your telling me, checking his background to ensure he doesn't have a history of psychopathic gun rampages is WRONG..

but allowing him to leave with the weapon then killing people is RIGHT?

If I was an American, I'd be checking the paint used on my gun, because clearly its got a toxic affect on the brain!



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 





I feel sorry for Obama.


Me too. It must be hard to be so far away from the country one pretends to speak for.




Any civilized nations should have background checks on everyone when they want to buy a gun.


Agreed.




Its common sense, anyone arguing here that background checks are wrong are completely deluding themselves.


No one is arguing that background checks are wrong, necessarily. Only that expanding background checks to the point where it would demand registration, and to force people to pay more money to exercise a RIGHT is not acceptable.




If you want to purchase a tool that can murder multiple people in seconds, then you need to have background checks. Full stop, bottom line.. how on earth can decent and smart people not get this concept?


Background checks don't prevent murder.




if your so addicted to your ego's needing firearms..


It's exactly this kind of elitist attitude that turns people off to anything you have to say.




ok, but someone needs to make sure the wrong people are getting their hands on these weapons.


Indeed. But the question is this, if we already have background checks, and the mentally ill are already precluded from owning firearms, and criminals are already barred from gun ownership as well, then how do they keep getting them? Perhaps maybe there's an underground market that no one can hope to control? Perhaps legislating against law abiding gun owners isn't the way to go.




America, jesus christ cant you get anything right when it comes to common sense and peace?


And the America bashing begins.





Have you not figured out why the world hates you and why your children and performing mass massacres ?


So you're saying the world hates us because we want to hold on to our right to arms? Are you saying this right is tied to mass murder, because if that's the case there are many other societies on Earth who have some explaining to do.




your morale decay is on show for the entire world to see and I understand why another race wouldnt want to come to Earth and communicate with our free world leaders.


Moral decay and holding on to our rights are not tandem concepts. They are antithetical to each other. The people in power trying to take away our rights are the ones most responsible for the moral decay in this country. They set the stage and everyone else plays their part. Those of us who are awake have thrown out the script and decided our rights, what we have left, are simply too precious to play games with anymore.

I could give a damn what another race from another world thinks. This is Earth, and this is the US of A. Suck it up.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 





man walks into a shop asking for a semi automatic rifle. No background checks performed, he now walks out with a weapons capable of killing dozens in a minute.


Is there a point there beyond the hyperbole?




your telling me, checking his background to ensure he doesn't have a history of psychopathic gun rampages is WRONG..


Sorry thought I lived in America where people were innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in front of a judge, and jury of their peers, and not the kangroo courts of mob mentality.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 





really? man walks into a shop asking for a semi automatic rifle. No background checks performed, he now walks out with a weapons capable of killing dozens in a minute.


Obviously you've fallen for the propaganda. It's called a 4473 form. Look it up. No gun shop operating LEGALLY can let a weapon go without submitting a back ground check.




your telling me, checking his background to ensure he doesn't have a history of psychopathic gun rampages is WRONG..


I don't know what he's telling you. But I'm telling you that we already have background checks. And anyone with a proven history of that kind of violence is either dead or in prison.




but allowing him to leave with the weapon then killing people is RIGHT?


No one has the right to murder. Nice hyperbole and oversimplification.




If I was an American, I'd be checking the paint used on my gun, because clearly its got a toxic affect on the brain!


Since you're not an American perhaps you should check your facts before spouting off this trite BS you call "points". Knock off the insults.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 




Background checks don't prevent murder.


I respectfully disagree.
What is it Americans are afraid of?
It frustrates me how stupid you are, for a country that is so smart.
You hold onto your constitution only when it suits you.

Having a background check done, when your purchasing a deadly weapon should be common freak'n sense.. but for a fair few of you you get all stroppy and say its a breach of your rights.

what about other peoples rights to walk around in public without the threat of some looney american shooting off bullets from a gun he just purchased?

Look flame me, do your pedantic per word replies but i wont be visiting this thread or replying.

It frustrates me to hell how stupidly uneducated some people must be to not believe background checks for deadly weapons is warranted.

flame away!




posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 





No one is arguing that background checks are wrong,


I am background checks are nothing but a judgement of an entire group that has been found guilty, and each and every time have to prove their innocence to a set of predetermined rules in Washington that only perfect people can pass.

Last time a checked people are only human prone to making mistakes, and should not be punished for the rest of the natural lives.

Background checks are nothing but "papers please" Gestapo style.


edit on 17-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join