U.S. Government responsible for another gun death

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by lostngone, Jul 6, 2013.

  1. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #1
    http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-atf-fast-furious-20130705,0,2692834.story



    The U.S. Government is trying to ban this type of firearm and says I need a background check before I can buy one. At the same time it was knowing allowing the sale of this type of firearm to the Mexican drug cartels that is killing not only Mexicans but U.S. citizens as well.

    I wonder if the U.S. Government did a single background check with all the small arms they sent to Syria?
     
  2. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #2
    There's some irony in one of the most staunch PRSI firearm apologists starting a thread highlighting how terrible guns are.
     
  3. iMikeT macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #3
    Hands off my bible!

    ----------


    Thou shall not make fun of the 2nd commandment that dog gave to the bible rights advocates!
     
  4. xShane macrumors 6502a

    xShane

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Location:
    United States
    #4
    I think you're just effectively closed this thread.
     
  5. lostngone thread starter macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #5
    Guns are not terrible.

    Rather then trying to ban them how about we stop handing them out to the drug cartels and terrorist organizations first.
     
  6. lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #6
    But I thought guns don't kill people, people do, right?
     
  7. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    Yes, and the people that the Federal Government has been handing them to will use them to kill innocent people.
     
  8. aerok macrumors 65816

    aerok

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2011
    #8
    The USA needs to fix its domestic problems before worrying beyond their borders.
     
  9. lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #9
    So? The criminals would just get the guns somewhere else, right? They'll just break the law anyway, right?

    Standard GOP arguments against gun restriction laws.
     
  10. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #10
    Yes, most likely they will, I'd like for our govt. not to be the source of their weaponry though.

    It seems as though you don't even know what you're arguing anymore.
     
  11. lannister80, Jul 6, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2013

    lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #11
    Actually, I would rather the US provide their weapons.

    Option A) US provides weapons, traces where weapons go, bust people, etc.
    Option B) Bad gun sellers/runners provide weapons *anyway*, but no one gets to trace a thing. And all that $ used to buy weapons goes into the underground economy.

    Even if Option A fails, and they can't bust anyone, etc, it's still no worse than Option B (as the bad guys would get guns somewhere else anyway)

    I'm stating that pro-gun, "guns don't kill people, people do" folks who say that the US Gov is responsible for the deaths of the people who were killed by F&F guns are hypocrites.
     
  12. iMikeT macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #12

    You got that right!
     
  13. lostngone thread starter macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #13
    Well call me a hypocrite then!

    I am a citizen of the United States.
    I do not have a criminal record.
    I have passed local, state AND federal background checks for firearms.
    I have participated in handgun(tactical), shotgun and long gun training.
    I am a licensed CCW holder.

    Yet my Government is trying to take my constitutional right away to own this type of firearm at the same time giving them to terrorists overseas and knowingly allowing them to be sold to the mexican drug cartels.
     
  14. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #14
    They are indeed. Well said.
     
  15. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #15
    Take a deep breath. Go read the Constitution. What kind of arms were they talking about at the time? Is anyone trying to take away your right to serve in your state militia, should the governor of your state ask? Is anyone trying to take away your musket?

    Now, governments have been supplying weapons to other combatants in war zones for a long time. There is always a risk of their not being used as intended. So, we could ban the U.S. government from doing so. I wonder what would have happened in WWII if the U.S. had only supplied itself?

    I don't know as much about Fast and Furious as you do, apparently. All I know is what was in the Forbes article and what is in the current Wikipedia article:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fast_and_Furious

    I'm puzzled, though, that while normally "guns don't kill people, people kill people", nevertheless, in this case, ATF is responsible for actions of foreign drug dealers. Surely the foreign drug dealers would have gotten the weapons they wanted somehow anyway, right? I mean, that is what the gun lobby always says about criminals getting the guns they want whether or not sales are restricted. So, I admit, I'm not following your logic.
     
  16. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #16
    Less concerned about a man dying than you are about wanting to be able to have the gun that killed him yourself. Another proud advertisement for gun owners.
     
  17. lostngone thread starter macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #17
    Yes, I am more concerned about protecting myself and my rights.

    What the government did was illegal they tried to cover it up and got caught. Even know we still don't know how far any of this went.
     
  18. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #18
    I'm not sure it's logic. It's more a healthy serving of cognitive dissonance. As lostngone proudly proclaims, the dead man is nothing but a political tool to further his ideological agenda. Such gun apologists are not people who are going to care about anything but their own interests. And they will have no shame in that.
     
  19. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #19
    This is probably one of the few points where we agree. It's ridiculous how we distribute firearms to uneasy allies who are later viewed as enemy combatants. I wish we (as in the US) would stop meddling in the Middle East in general, but that seems unlikely.
     
  20. lostngone thread starter macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #20
    I have read the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment is not only about the militia but also about individual rights to bear arms as well. As far as your musket statement is concerned that must mean the 1st Amendment only covers the hand press, hand written word and face to face speech and nothing else.[/QUOTE]
     
  21. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #21
    God damn, when are we going to be done in this country twitch the mindset that any bad guy is now a terrorist? Its misuse of the label that lulls the public into putting up with the very erosion of liberty that you guys decry!
     
  22. lostngone, Jul 6, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2013

    lostngone thread starter macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #22
    So before you drag another one of my threads off topic I want to make sure I understand what you are saying.

    From your statements in this thread you are okay with the U.S. Government knowing allowing small arm to be sold to the Mexican drug cartels? <--- That is a question(before you claim I am putting words in your mouth)

    ----------


    "Terrorist", "Rebel", "Freedom Fighter" it all depends on your point of view.
     
  23. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #23
    That is not just "a question". You are putting words in my mouth. I have said nothing of the sort. Just putting a question mark does not change that. It is however a very good demonstration of your intellectually dishonesty and lack of objectivity when it comes to guns.

    When there is nothing else to argue it's all appeals to emotion. Labelling people terrorists willy nilly is about as productive as pro-gun rape hypotheticals.
     
  24. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
  25. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #25
    Comeon, man. It's been like a week since the last one. Quit complaining. :mad:
     

Share This Page