Holder: We Want to Explore Gun Tracking Bracelets

reply to post by minusinfinity

I know my opinion won't be popular on this website but I don't care.

Your opinion whether I agree with it or not is always welcome. Otherwise we have no discussion.

If you own a weapon and use it legally why do you care if somebody 'tracks' you or whatever?

Because of the 4th Amendment.

My question is why are gun owners exempt from the 4th Amendment. Lastly, where is the "if you've got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" clause of the 4th Amendment?

If you plan to stage an uprising or rob a bank or do some other stupid thing with your weapon that is the only reason you should worry.

Is it? So you're not worried that the NSA is spying on the whole world. Getting into your personal correspondence with your spouse, with your doctor, with your kids? Destroying your ability to have a confidential conversation with your lawyer? But because it's a gun those right don't matter right? I'm pretty sure the Constitution's bill of rights does not have a clause that says you're entitled to every right listed here unless you are exercising your 2nd Amendment rights.

If you plan to hunt or go target shooting then I don't think you have much to fear.

See all previous comments addressing this malinformed notion of our rights as Americans.

I look at the state of this country and I think it's time to crack down on some of the lunatics who own weapons. I know, I know if I'm worried about the criminal owning a gun I should go buy a gun. (rolling my eyes.)

I don't think this concept jives with reality:

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

As a matter of fact violent crime in general is down over all in the United States. We rank 97th in violent crimes committed per 100,000 citizens. I hardly think that puts us at the brink of societal breakdown via criminal elements.

By that logic if I worry about a suicide bomber I should strap bombs to my ass and blow him up first. Or what about the airline hijacker, should I take control of the plane before the 'terrorist'?

Hyperbole and logical fallacies is not a good substrate by which to grow a cogent argument.

reply to post by seeker1963


Exactly. Unfortunately, they are too many sheeples that would believe anything the government says.

minusinfinity
I know my opinion won't be popular on this website but I don't care.

If you own a weapon and use it legally why do you care if somebody 'tracks' you or whatever?

If you plan to stage an uprising or rob a bank or do some other stupid thing with your weapon that is the only reason you should worry.

If you plan to hunt or go target shooting then I don't think you have much to fear.

I look at the state of this country and I think it's time to crack down on some of the lunatics who own weapons. I know, I know if I'm worried about the criminal owning a gun I should go buy a gun. (rolling my eyes.)

By that logic if I worry about a suicide bomber I should strap bombs to my ass and blow him up first. Or what about the airline hijacker, should I take control of the plane before the 'terrorist'?

Why do I care if somebody 'tracks' me? I don't. You can track me. But if you force me to wear a bracelet transmitting my location at all times (or even my distance from a gun at all times) then you are violating my rights by forcing me to express something I have to interest in expressing. Its a basic freedom of expression issue. I have a right to say whatever I'd like in my private space and I also have a right to remain silent about things like my geographic coordinates.

I'm sorry but the US does not and *should not* say "everyone has a right to bear arms so long as they have the appropriate tracking bracelet". The very fact that they are studying the issue is criminal of them because they are exploring options that are criminal activity against the US constitution. The constitution means nothing to you, which would be fine if you didn't seem to think everyone should bend over backwards to worship the thugs pretending to follow it as a higher class of people. You hold them to a lower standard and surely they would tell you they should be held to a lower standard and have all the rights and privileges nobody else can have... like access to "illegal firearms" but with none of the responsibility of using them properly.

I have yet to hear any gun control supporter state that those who abuse guns the most to actually kill people with - the United States government and other governments, need to have their guns controlled and regulated first before any one else (like the non-abusers) has theirs taken away. Never once have I heard them say this. Its as if gun control isn't really their goal but rather forcing others to kneel down before the supreme leaders is their goal. At least that is one explanation of why someone would ignore the greatest abusers with a free pass but say the non-abusers need extremist prohibitions and tracking measures against them.

We have these guns to battle corruption and hostility that is unwarranted and illegal from an outside source. Identifying me would be a control measure on ME not the opposing factors.THEY are what we need to address not ME OR MINE we keep to ourselves.
But THAT isn't enough for some and they wish to foist their fears onto my back leaving us ALL defenseless from CURRENTLY dangerous foreign aggressors and bankers using young uninformed minds as useful idiots LIKE THEY DID MY ASS FOR THE COLD WAR.
But this time their hippies..in place for decades in academia and in money pits on each coast,want CONFORMITY to the P.C Reichsfuhrer so we can have a "Demolition Man" inclusive culture that is hooked into the latest cause de jour and lousy music with girls dressed as 70s hookers.
No thanks, YOU'RE wrong and the guns STAY. Fix the problem children ,not the masses and get off my ass I bite...hard.

AND IN OTHER NEWS.

20-Injured In Stabbing At Franklin Regional High School

Holder going to 'support' tracking braclets for knives ?

Oh guns, and kinves were already 'banned' from schools long before federal gun laws came on the books.

reply to post by neo96


Yes Neo, we understand the failed argument that guns and knives are banned at schools but these things still happen anyway. Laws don't prevent crime, but without them, there's nothing that prosecutors can do when these crimes happen.

The gun rights groups want to make you believe that if they eliminated all laws pertaining to guns that crime would drop. This is in a very flawed sense is true. Because murder wouldn't be a crime anymore, shooting up a public school wouldn't be a criminal act. I'm sure that there wouldn't be MORE murders at school, cause most humans are pretty decent people, but the flawed logic here is that prosecutors wouldn't be able to do anything about the mass shootings if they didn't have any laws on the books pertaining to guns.

HauntWok

but the flawed logic here is that prosecutors wouldn't be able to do anything about the mass shootings if they didn't have any laws on the books pertaining to guns.

Not sure how even such an extreme act as wiping out all gun laws would make murder no longer prosecutable.

What's it worth to tack on another year or two for unlawful possession onto somebody already looking at a dozen life sentences?

ETA: These extra laws on things and items that cause no harm to anyone or anything just so prosecutors can attach an insignificant number of years to the sentences of murderers, rapists and burglars are also used like this:

In a surprising twist at the end of a long trial, a District of Columbia judge found Mark Witaschek guilty of “attempted possession of unlawful ammunition” for antique replica muzzleloader bullets.

link

I would not agree that the ability to hand another 24 months to somebody already serving 10-20 is worth things like this happening to people who cause no harm to anyone or anything.

reply to post by HauntWok

Yes Neo, we understand the failed argument that guns and knives are banned at schools but these things still happen anyway

The only failed argument here is the people supporting fascist gun control laws.

Laws don't prevent crime,

No they don't. They only punish after the fact.

And they punish people who done nothing wrong, but hell make them accountable for someone elses actions.

Right ?

That is what all gun control laws do.

The gun rights groups want to make you believe that if they eliminated all laws pertaining to guns that crime would drop

The anti gunners would have us believe more laws crime drops!

After 70 + years of gun control.

Looky there a small percentage of the populace is still breaking the previous law that says 'Thou shall not harm or kill someone else'.

But hell make more Laws!

Because murder wouldn't be a crime anymore,

Well it isn't a 'crime' for the people who make gun control laws since they are the biggest murders in this country.

There is definitly a 'flawed' argument here.

Not by the pro constitution, PRO BILL OF RIGHTS though.

reply to post by neo96


So here's a couple questions for you Neo.

In the last 30 years has there or has there not been a significant increase in gun control laws?

In the last 30 years has there or has there not been a reduction in gun violence in this country?

I think the cause and effect here is pretty clear.

reply to post by neo96


So...I am having a hard time reconciling the headline with what he actually said?...which you seem to have omitted? Which is strange...an OP that chooses not to include the quote at the center of the topic?

Where does he discuss "tracking"?

"I think that one of the things that we learned when we were trying to get passed those common sense reforms last year, Vice President Biden and I had a meeting with a group of technology people and we talked about how guns can be made more safe," he said.

"By making them either through finger print identification, the gun talks to a bracelet or something that you might wear, how guns can be used only by the person who is lawfully in possession of the weapon."

"It's those kinds of things that I think we want to try to explore so that we can make sure that people have the ability to enjoy their Second Amendment rights, but at the same time decreasing the misuse of weapons that lead to the kinds of things that we see on a daily basis," Holder said.

www.foxnews.com...

One day soon I hope to return to ATS and find people HONESTLY debating facts, rather than creating and celebrating propaganda

Only if they get to wear Politican tracking bracelets

reply to post by HauntWok


Here is the last 30 years, hell the last 200 years.

Does a LAW ALREADY exist that says A person can not harm or kill someone else ?

YES.

So what is the GD point of superfluous laws ?

In the last 30 years has there or has there not been a significant increase in gun control laws?

Yeah thousands of them.

In the last 30 years has there or has there not been a reduction in gun violence in this country?

Apparently not that is why we 'need' more of them says the anti gun crowd.

So...I am having a hard time reconciling the headline with what he actually said?...which you seem to have omitted? Which is strange...an OP that chooses not to include the quote at the center of the topic?

Go figure.

Hell take it up with the article author.

One day soon I hope to return to ATS and find people HONESTLY debating facts, rather than creating and celebrating propaganda

That's rich considering the gun control 'debate' is DEVOID of facts that support the anti gunners so called arguments.

That do nothing that celebrate 'propaganda' that people are either too dumb, and can't be trusted with their constitutional rights.

That is why laws need to be made, and have been made for over 70 years.

That are clearly unconstitutional laws that disparage our rights.

(QUOTE)

If you are an American and "don't care" about the Constitution that's just disgusting.

Maybe we need trackers on every supporter of unconstitutional ideals in the US. For their own good of course, if you're not doing anything wrong why would you care?

Feel free to track me.




I care about the constitution and people should be free to carry a weapon. I'm just saying people should be checked out and maybe monitored before they walk around carrying high power weapons.

Again if you don't intend to kill somebody or do something crazy why be concerned?




And that kind of thinking has got us in the situation we are in now
with the NSA and all. This nation has too many submissive people in it
that will just accept anything as long as they feel safe because the
goverment tells them they can, ya thats right just laydown and take it
you will be safe

reply to post by darepairman


Those who trade their LIBERTIES for a false sense of security will soon find themselves as having neither.

Ben Franklin said it better.

reply to post by neo96


Ok, so, you have decided to answer my questions dishonestly?

Obviously you believe there have been THOUSANDS of new gun control laws passed in the last 30 years.

There has been a marked decrease in gun related deaths in this country over the last 30 years.

THEREFORE, gun control laws WORK.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Yep, yep. I realized. Even wrote about it on page 2 or thereabouts.

But you know how it is 'round here. Some people just want to get all excited. Hope that when we really need them excited they have some energy left.

reply to post by HauntWok

Ok, so, you have decided to answer my questions dishonestly?

How so?

Obviously you believe there have been THOUSANDS of new gun control laws passed in the last 30 years.

Between States, and the Federal government ?

Yep.

There has been a marked decrease in gun related deaths in this country over the last 30 years.

That is not what the antigunners say.

Because we 'need' more of them.

Then they tried to passed that crap from Feinstein.

Then made them E0s under the current administration.

THEREFORE, gun control laws WORK.

No they don't because if they did there would be no Fort Hoods, No Aurora's, No Sandy Hooks.No Columbines. etc.

That Columibine happened DURING Clintons ASW ban.

Of course all those were already illegal because it VIOLATED federal law,State laws that says 'thou shall not harm or kill'.

Superfluous laws work!

HauntWok
reply to post by neo96

 

Ok, so, you have decided to answer my questions dishonestly?

Obviously you believe there have been THOUSANDS of new gun control laws passed in the last 30 years.

There has been a marked decrease in gun related deaths in this country over the last 30 years.

THEREFORE, gun control laws WORK.

You dont think this sort of cause and effect just might be a tad disingenuous? There are seriously no other factors at play?

To think all this time social science and criminology have been wasting studying economic factors, lifestyle factors, mental health/illness, environmental influences, dietary issues, etc....

And the answer all along is just pass another law.

I know, lets make everything extra-illegal. That'll reduce violent crime even more!

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

You dont think this sort of cause and effect just might be a tad disingenuous? There are seriously no other factors at play?

The topic, and the gun control 'debate' clearly does show who truly supports the 'Prison Industrial Complex'.