Bill denying gun access to those on terrorist watch list defeated

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by blackfox, Jun 13, 2016.

  1. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #1
    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-blocks-bill-stop-terrorists-buying-guns

    I find this one hard to believe, especially under recent circumstances. The bill did have provisions for those who had been put on the list by mistake. Seems like a no-brainer. While I'm loathe to start another gun thread, I'm open to arguments as to why this bill should not have passed...
     
  2. DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #2
    Look at how RICO statutes are being misused. There's no "no-brainer" (such as determining who gets put on a terrorist watch list) that some bureaucrat can't twist to suit his needs.
     
  3. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #3
  4. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
  5. DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #5
  6. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #6
    Not necessarily. As JK's post shows, we need to have a more accurate, transparent system to prevent innocent people from being shuffled on these lists.

    Like the no-fly list? Hell, you and I could be on it due to something we sarcastically said during one of our discussions here in PRSI for all we know. It doesn't take much for the government to classify you as a potential threat. Something that arbitrary shouldn't be used to take away more rights and freedoms.
     
  7. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #7
    Not when Chucky retweets the unhinged moonbats.

    [​IMG]

    And you want to add people to a list which nobody knows the criteria for being placed on said list?
    --- Post Merged, Jun 13, 2016 ---
    People that don't like turtles.
     
  8. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #8
    Freaks. :mad:
     
  9. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #9
    Agreed. Someone's Constitutional rights should not be taken away by some nameless/faceless bureaucrat.
     
  10. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #10
  11. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #11
    Unless there's some really damn good reason. The Orlando shooter probably would've been a blinking red light, considering his webbrowsing habits and associations beforehand.

    But like webbuzz said, things like the no-fly list have no known preset criteria, and can target anyone for the most arbitrary of reasons. I've read stories about people finding themselves on the list due to something they said on Facebook, or having a similar last name to a high risk terrorist suspect. Even worse, getting yourself removed from it is practically an exercise in bureaucratic futility.
     
  12. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #12
    Then go to a judge and get it properly adjudicated.
     
  13. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #13
    I rarely agree with you, but you're 100% right on this one.
     
  14. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #14
    and ammosexuals keep trying to arm everyone no matter what they have done.
     
  15. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #15
    Look, I know where the argument posited is going...I understand it is a potentially slippery-slope when gun restriction are placed on those who pose a "threat-to-the-State". Nevertheless, there are people that shouldn't be allowed guns on these lists...what about them? What about loopholes that allow private sales of guns w/o background checks? As responsible gun-owners, is that a good practice?
     
  16. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #16
    who has told YOU to buy guns? no one.
     
  17. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #17
    Yup. We need our checks and balances. Even if it does mean we're "protecting the terrorists".
     
  18. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #18
    how do YOU know that?
     
  19. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #19
    pdqgp the NRA and several others.
     
  20. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #20
    Look, I know there are a bunch of responsible gun-owners who will respond to this thread, and I can understand your argument - why should you be punished for the political reaction to a few loons? Still, if this was a thread about welfare queens gaming the welfare system, some might point to the system itself being to blame. If this thread was about Abortion, would you as a Pro-choice person feel that late-term abortion bans are a reasonable compromise?
    --- Post Merged, Jun 13, 2016 ---
    Well, it's pretty bloody obvious now, isn't it? Are you seriously saying that there should be no oversight because it'll be imperfect? That's bold.
     
  21. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #21
    it's NOT "obvious" because YOU have NO CLUE WHY they are there, there are kids on the list, plenty who should NOT be there with almost no way to get out. you ASSUME there are some who should not own guns because they are on that list.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 13, 2016 ---
    I have no problems with registration and BG checks for ALL sales, what else do YOU suggest?
     
  22. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #22
    Look at all the tangibles they look at to approve people for credit, and that's still far from fool proof.

    It's not that easy to implement and sort out those that shouldn't have guns, without infringing on people's rights.

    A perfect system is impossible.
     
  23. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #23
    Well, in fairness - I also have no clue how to program my DVR either. So you're saying we shouldn't have a list then?
     
  24. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #24
    Either not being swayed by compassion or emotion, not understanding what the Second Amendment is supposed to be about, the number of representatives from each political party then tallied with the potential of veto override, and/or there's a really neat rider hiding in the bill voted on.
     
  25. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #25
    ask your kids, that's how I get by :p
     

Share This Page