Actually that is a convenient talking point but not accurate. As it stands today, if a criminal wants to he can go to a gun show and buy a weapon from a private party and not have to go through a background check. The proposed bill would have prohibited that but still allowed private sales or transfers between family and close friends without going through a check. There was a huge amount of misinformation cast about regarding this legislation.
Well if you can legally go to a swap meet and sell a gun you bought to a person who you don’t know for sure is batsh!t crazy or is about to murder his wife or something, it must give you great comfort to know that you don’t violate any laws by checking that person’s background.
Are you glad there were no laws to make it difficult for the “foreign terrorist murderers” to get the guns they used to rob the 7-11, murder the MIT cop, highjack the Mercedes, and shoot it out with police? Are you glad that their right to acquire weapons without identifying themselves or going through a background check was protected? Do you think a well-armed populace would have prevented the bombing, or rendered the massive police pursuit in progress unnecessary? Every citizen with a clean record has a perfect right to own weapons. The proposed law would not have affected that right at all. Defeating it serves only to enable and abet those who would break the laws, those who want to avoid the ten-minute process that is a background check, and pander to the paranoia of a minority.
A terrorist with a concealed weapon is a threat to everyone. Look at what they did to a police officer who had a gun and what they did to other armed officers who had guns with them. Your bumper sticker slogan doesn’t hold water. Re-read doughfoot’s post slowly, preferably word by word and let it sink in.
Considering that the majority of senators actually voted for the bill but it still didnt pass(due to the stupidity of requiring a “supermajority”), this gives lie to the assertion by goobers that this is “representative republic in action”. No, it’s stupid Senate rules in action that make it literally impossible for the Senate to do its job. This is on Reid for not reforming the Senate rules when he had the chance. Guess he wants to be as obstructionist as the Repubes when the shoe’s on the other foot.
“Every citizen with a conceal carry weapon is a threat to the terrorist. Unarmed people are victims and shields. Does that make you happy?”
How would anyone with a gun have prevented the Boston bombings? They left the backpacks behind, mostly unobserved. How would a civilian with a gun have changed that? Yours is a silly and fatuous argument.
Dtroutma about 11 years ago
Why did the chickenhawk cross the road? To deposit his check from the NRA.
benbrilling about 11 years ago
Allow me to remind you that 54% voted in favor and we live with a governing body where 40% controls the decisions…
ABOLISH THE FILIBUSTER!!
Mickey 13 about 11 years ago
“it was a law against law abiding citizens.”
Actually that is a convenient talking point but not accurate. As it stands today, if a criminal wants to he can go to a gun show and buy a weapon from a private party and not have to go through a background check. The proposed bill would have prohibited that but still allowed private sales or transfers between family and close friends without going through a check. There was a huge amount of misinformation cast about regarding this legislation.
Stormrider2112 about 11 years ago
Yeah, why have any laws at all if law-abiding citizens aren’t going to do that kind of thing?
Chillbilly about 11 years ago
Well if you can legally go to a swap meet and sell a gun you bought to a person who you don’t know for sure is batsh!t crazy or is about to murder his wife or something, it must give you great comfort to know that you don’t violate any laws by checking that person’s background.
Doughfoot about 11 years ago
Are you glad there were no laws to make it difficult for the “foreign terrorist murderers” to get the guns they used to rob the 7-11, murder the MIT cop, highjack the Mercedes, and shoot it out with police? Are you glad that their right to acquire weapons without identifying themselves or going through a background check was protected? Do you think a well-armed populace would have prevented the bombing, or rendered the massive police pursuit in progress unnecessary? Every citizen with a clean record has a perfect right to own weapons. The proposed law would not have affected that right at all. Defeating it serves only to enable and abet those who would break the laws, those who want to avoid the ten-minute process that is a background check, and pander to the paranoia of a minority.
d_legendary1 about 11 years ago
A terrorist with a concealed weapon is a threat to everyone. Look at what they did to a police officer who had a gun and what they did to other armed officers who had guns with them. Your bumper sticker slogan doesn’t hold water. Re-read doughfoot’s post slowly, preferably word by word and let it sink in.
Doughfoot about 11 years ago
Did I say I had anything against concealed-carry permits? No. Did I deny that people have a right to own weapons? No. Try paying attention.
Boomer Premium Member about 11 years ago
Someone is spiking the water in DC with stupid pills.
Mephistopheles about 11 years ago
YAY!!!! We didn’t use a sad tradgey to trod upon the rights and freedoms of ordinary and law abiding citizens. The world is a better place.
Dtroutma about 11 years ago
Maybe it should be “filbert-buster” instead of “filibuster” as in the last four years it’s been used hundreds of times by nuts? (on the right)
Mickey 13 about 11 years ago
Congressional rules mandate that 60 votes need to be cast for the measure to pass, not a simple majority.
kamwick about 11 years ago
Considering that the majority of senators actually voted for the bill but it still didnt pass(due to the stupidity of requiring a “supermajority”), this gives lie to the assertion by goobers that this is “representative republic in action”. No, it’s stupid Senate rules in action that make it literally impossible for the Senate to do its job. This is on Reid for not reforming the Senate rules when he had the chance. Guess he wants to be as obstructionist as the Repubes when the shoe’s on the other foot.
McSpook about 11 years ago
Guess again. Or just continue to make stuff up as you go. Either way, you have the same absolute lack of credibility.
McSpook about 11 years ago
“Every citizen with a conceal carry weapon is a threat to the terrorist. Unarmed people are victims and shields. Does that make you happy?”
How would anyone with a gun have prevented the Boston bombings? They left the backpacks behind, mostly unobserved. How would a civilian with a gun have changed that? Yours is a silly and fatuous argument.