Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
You think Tiger will pardon you? He wants nothing to do with you. You're just another crazy marijuana killer like from a few years ago.thank you.
Tiger is like Michael Savage, but without the gay bashing and racism.
Obama using kids as human shields...
- Thread starter NLXSK1
- Start date
Tiger is like Michael Savage, but without the gay bashing and racism.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Reefer madness. Disqualified.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
The Obama administration has admitted that NONE of the proposals made would have stopped the Connecticut shooting...
Just because the legislation does not address the actual issue does not prevent the politicians from DOING something.. Basically stripping away a good segment of our privacy rights. Buy a couple boxes of bullets and be visited by the BATF to justify your purchase... God Bless Amerika...
High five!!!!!
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Nlsx you crack me up, just oozing hypocrisy.
A few months back you ranted about voter ID endlessly. So you support needing an ID to vote but not for buying a firearm?
A few months back you ranted about voter ID endlessly. So you support needing an ID to vote but not for buying a firearm?
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
You are mixing up apples and banana's...
I dont have a big issue with a background check to purchase a weapon although it would make it damn inconvenient for 2 friends to transact business. However, that has nothing to do with firearm registration where the weapons are tracked from person to person in some federal government database.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Good!!
Then they can go after all the douchebags buying at gun shows and reselling to criminals.
Then they can go after all the douchebags buying at gun shows and reselling to criminals.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
It does not happen as much as you would imagine. Most of the mass killings are done with legal handguns like Loughner and/or the Connecticut killer. If you can somehow prevent criminals from stealing guns it would be helpful.
I would not be against a 3rd party verification system set up at gun shows to provide background checks. However, private citizens and family members should still be able to sell guns amongst each other without having to have a 3rd party sanction the transaction.
There will always be stolen and illegal guns available to someone who wants them and background checks are never going to fix that.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
"Corrupt federally licensed gun dealers: Federally licensed gun dealers send more guns to the criminal market than any other single source. Nearly 60% of the guns used in crime are traced back to a small numberjust 1.2%of crooked gun dealers. Corrupt dealers frequently have high numbers of missing guns, in many cases because theyre selling guns off the books to private sellers and criminals. In 2005, the ATF examined 3,083 gun dealers and found 12,274 missing firearms."
Just because it won't eliminate the problem doesn't mean we shouldn't work to reduce the problem
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
How many firearms are missing because of the 'Fast and Furious' program?
How you can trust your government because a liberal is in charge is beyond me...
canndo
Well-Known Member
I don't see the apple and orange dichotomy here. You would do everything in your power to see to it that the minute possiblity of an inelligible voter be prevented from breaking the law through any means possible, perhaps and in all likelyhood inhibiting the citizen's rights in the process and yet you havea grave problem if those same sets of proceedures were enacted with regard to firearms. This is typical of the right in so many areas.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Lol nice attempt at changing the subject. It's like having a conversation with Glenn Beck on a crack binge
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
One is like being carded for having a few drinks in a bar.
The second is like having your name, address, social security number and the number of drinks you had tracked and turned into the federal government.
If you cannot see the glaring difference I cant help you.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
How is a program that allowed thousands of illegal weapons to get into the hands of criminals different than your assertion that a few bad guys are selling all the guns?
ink the world
Well-Known Member
It isn't my assertion, it's the ATF's.
Why so opposed to records about firearms purchases?
You profiting from selling guns illegally to gangbangers?
If you aren't committing a crime you have nothing to fear
Why so opposed to records about firearms purchases?
You profiting from selling guns illegally to gangbangers?
If you aren't committing a crime you have nothing to fear
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Oh well, those guys are trustworthy.... LOL!
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
That's what I keep trying to tell people about the Patriot Act. If you aren't doing anything wrong, warrantless wiretaps shouldn't scare you at all. Bush was awesome!
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I have to fear that the information will be made public in some manner and put me in danger.
Are you going to put up a sign proclaiming your house as a gun free zone?
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Uhmm, no one said that database should be public; or at least I didn't.
If your ownership of guns was to be made public, how in the hell is that akin to advertising your home as a gun free zone. It would be the exact opposite
If your ownership of guns was to be made public, how in the hell is that akin to advertising your home as a gun free zone. It would be the exact opposite
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Do you know whether I own a weapon or not?
The database of gun owners was released for several counties of Connecticut as public information. Why do you think the data will not be hacked once collected by the government? How many people will have access to the data?
The government has no right to know what kind, how many or anything else about the guns I own if I am a legal citizen.