Congress Slips CISA Into a Budget Bill and it Passed!

be sure that most of these Congress persons will be reelected. People seem to trust they (Congress) are acting in the best interest. I think they are acting to make them selves fell less of the over blown fear state that has been created.

originally posted by: Blazemore2000
a reply to: Informer1958

Those who give up liberty for safety, deserve neither.

Sorry but this isn't the 1800s anymore.

Give up your security and you will be one of the first getting beheaded on Al-Jazeera, followed by the other 300 million Americans.

a reply to: OhOkYeah

I'll have some of what your smoking....

Yeah... 300+ million of the most heavily armed people on the planet are going to be beheaded on Al Jazeera. Thx for the laugh. What color is the sky in your reality?

originally posted by: Blazemore2000
a reply to: OhOkYeah

I'll have some of what your smoking....

Yeah... 300+ million of the most heavily armed people on the planet are going to be beheaded on Al Jazeera. Thx for the laugh. What color is the sky in your reality?

And this is why Osoma Obama/Hilary and the U.N are dead set on disarming American citizens

originally posted by: neo96
So people.

Carters FiSA Act.

Clintons Omnibus Counter Terrorism Act.

Bush's Patriot Act.

Obamas NDAA, and CISA.

All the odds are on it will be signed in to law barring some miracle.

Oh yeah people we are 'free'.

Free to be spied on, and continually lose more rights in the name of 'security'.

We all know what's next as the op already made the connection to.

Say good bye to the second forever.

The last great step in totalitarian regimes.

Quite a leap from this bill to the end of the 2nd Amendment, wouldn't you say? 350 million registered firearms in this country. You think they can take them all away without starting a civil war?

Since early 2015 I have no social media accounts except for a linkedin and this ats account.
A series of events caused my course of action. I feel safer without an online presence. Due to the simple fact that if anyone wanted to look into me they'd have to do it in physical form. Im no terrorist, however i have been labeled a radicalist because in my opinion 90% of the population are brain dead to the fact that life does not have to be poluted, dirty, nor hard. We all can live very prosperous lives. But since these ideals go against capitalism, and cut the bottoms out of our slave holder pockets; I feel I've been targeted once as a silencing attempt. Things have happened in my life that can't be left up to cooincidence. For instance before edward snowden leaked info about organized data dumping, I'd posted a post about prism to my facebook. I'd seen the original post on god like productions and it was deleted shortly after i saw the post as facts, and low and behold it was leaked as fact. So, if there is a domestic terror list i am sure im on it. Too bad my name is so common that they'd have to place 15% of the U.S. population on that list aswell.

FFS my high iq does nothing but get me flagged. I like to research radioactive isotopes in hopes of findin polar opposites in order to neutralize half lifes. Im sure if anyone looked into my search history they'd think im building a dirty bomb.

a reply to: Informer1958therec wasn't any excuse before the fbialready thought the wifw smelled funny but the gov gave her a visa anyway and nsa has already been doing this data mining for years they just using this as an excuse to block something else i guess we will find out shortly

a reply to: IsntLifeFunny

Quite a leap from this bill to the end of the 2nd Amendment, wouldn't you say?

Nope.

For those who have been paying attention to the news cycle where they are trying to conflate

Terrorism/no fliy list's/terrorist watch list's/mass shootings.

The powers that be are trying to make those terms interchangeable. When they are NOT.

They have the bullseye set on the second amendment, and they literally throwing out the word 'national security' to deprive the people of their RIGHTS.

originally posted by: rexsblues
They do this every x-mas. Perfect time to pass # like this.

Yep, it's like "Merry Christmas! We're going to pass you a big ol' s*** sandwich of legislation that you won't even begin to open up and realize the implications of until it's far too late, but hey! eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow your liberties DIE!"

a reply to: neo96

Your post = patently ridiculous.

There is a reason for applying scrutiny to those who would like to have assault weapons. There is a reason for looking at 'Gun Shows' as possible 'ways to get a gun.'

Are you aware that ISIS recruitment videos and messages are telling people: "The easiest and best way to to get an assualt weapon is at gun shows." ????? You aware of that?

ARE YOU NOT AWARE that the San Bernardino killers had built up an arsenal of weapons, and their neighbors saw that those packages were being delivered - - and then they went all jihad????

WHY do you not want there to be surveillance of suspicious activity?

(Oh dear - I just asked you a bunch of questions - I know you are allergic to answering questions from me. Consider them rhetorical, neo.)

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Your post = patently ridiculous.

Nope

There is a reason for applying scrutiny to those who would like to have assault weapons. There is a reason for looking at 'Gun Shows' as possible 'ways to get a gun.'

Please stop using that made up term by politico's 'assault weapon' just like that other made up term 'mass shooting'.

Assault has no real world definition than how a weapon looks. It has no basis WHAT SO EVER on function.

And name ONE mass shooting that used the 'gun show' loophole.

You can't because NONE of them used it.

Are you aware that ISIS recruitment videos and messages are telling people: "The easiest and best way to to get an assualt weapon is at gun shows." ????? You aware of that?

Are you AWARE:

Gun show loophole, gun law loophole, Brady law loophole (or Brady bill loophole), private sale loophole, or private sale exemption is a political term in the United States referring to sales of firearms by private sellers, including those done at gun shows, dubbed the "secondary market"

en.wikipedia.org...

ARE YOU NOT AWARE that the San Bernardino killers had built up an arsenal of weapons, and their neighbors saw that those packages were being delivered - - and then they went all jihad?

I AM AWARE that the SB Attackers passed background checks. Used a STRAW BUYER..

That REGULATES 'gun shows'.

In 1999, California enacted the nation’s broadest legislation to increase oversight at gun shows (AB 295). In California, all firearms transfers at gun shows must be processed through a licensed firearms dealer

smartgunlaws.org...

So there B.

Tell me another story.

Preferably one that is grounded in REALITY.

a reply to: neo96

Please stop using that made up term by politico's 'assault weapon' just like that other made up term 'mass shooting'.

I don't read "politico." I use my brain.

Assault has no real world definition than how a weapon looks. It has no basis WHAT SO EVER on function.

Yep, it does. Weapons designed for military use that can mow down people by the dozens...... = ASSAULT.

And name ONE mass shooting that used the 'gun show' loophole.

Uhhhh -

You can't because NONE of them used it.

How the hell do you know?????? You don't.

Whatever, as per usual, we are unable to communicate.
sigh


So there, neo. Let's just leave each other alone. I think You are wrong, and you think I am wrong.......
and so - this will never move forward.

It will just stay stagnant. I'm tired of stagnance. It smells putrid.

originally posted by: OhOkYeah

originally posted by: Blazemore2000
a reply to: Informer1958

Those who give up liberty for safety, deserve neither.

Sorry but this isn't the 1800s anymore.

Give up your security and you will be one of the first getting beheaded on Al-Jazeera, followed by the other 300 million Americans.

Hurr durr give up your guns and put a government cctv camera in your bathroom or else ISIS will cut your head off!!

... ... I'm literally ashamed. You're a child, and the reason we have a nanny state.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I don't read "politico." I use my brain.

No comment.

Yep, it does. Weapons designed for military use that can mow down people by the dozens...... = ASSAULT.

Try AGAIN neither the' AR-15' or the 'AK-47' were designed for the military. At least NOT what civilians have access to.

They were SPECIFICALLY designed for the CIVILIAN market.

No military in the world would carry either.

How the hell do you know?????? You don't.

Because SOME of us CAN read.

The vast majority of guns used in 15 recent mass shootings, including at least two of the guns used in the San Bernardino attack, were bought legally and with a federal background check

How They Got Their Guns

a reply to: neo96

Oh right, because I can't read.



You don't consider 14 people dead as a "mass shooting"? bleh

Regarding your extext:

The vast majority of guns used in 15 recent mass shootings, including at least two of the guns used in the San Bernardino attack, were bought legally and with a federal background check

Yet, you are averse to background checks or any sort of surveillance or regulation on who can get weapons........
right?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Then why do they not call, uhh, any military weapon an assault rifle?? If you join the military in any way, you will never hear the words "assault rifle" to describe one of their weapons.

It's a buzz word for the civilians, that's all and that's it. You're an eskimo, and you've bought a lot of ice, and we don't want any.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Yet, you are averse to background checks or any sort of surveillance or regulation on who can get weapons........ right?

That's right I am.

Because I don't think a person should have to ask the state for PERMISSION to exercise their constitutional RIGHTS.

I further find the LACK of due process disturbing to say the least.

That background check is a violation of the ENTIRE Bill of RiGHTS, and the 14th amendments.

I highly suggest reading the second where it says 'shall not be infringed.'

The 9th that says a thing or two about DENY and DISPARAGE RIghts we retain.

And the 5th about NO person shall be held answerable to a capital or other wise 'infamous' crime.

That 5th also goes on to say something about being 'tried' for the same crime TWICE.

The rest sans first deal with the FACT if someone commits a crime.

They get their day in courts of LAW, and CRIMES BE PROVEN.

Not hold the entire population of this country 'accountable' for the crime they didn't commit, or WILL EVER.

a reply to: Bundy

Friend, thanks for asking.

My husband is a veteran. He has several guns.....he has taught me how to use them, and I am NOT unaware of the difference between big-mag assault weapons of mass-killing potential and a rifle that can be used for home-defense.

So - yeah, I'm not an eskimo. I know you don't want any of the common sense being addressed.

Go ahead, let ANYONE who wants one have a gun, just like it is now. Gun shows, private sellers, straw buyers, garage sales, estate sales, etc.....

a reply to: neo96

Not hold the entire population of this country 'accountable' for the crime didn't commit, or WILL EVER.

OR WILL EVER?

wow.

Orange-hair guy who shot up a theater -

nm.

Obviously we hate each other. I guess there's no remedy for it.
Can't say I didn't try.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

That's right there B.

99.9% of gun owners commit NO crimes.



Reality is a bitter sweet pill to swallow at times.