Rand Paul hurts Obama's Feelings

[Chocolate Hog]

"I've heard folks say that having the families of victims lobby for this legislation was somehow misplaced–a 'prop,' somebody called it," he said. "Are they serious? Do they really think that thousands of families whose lives have been shattered by gun violence don't have a right to weigh in on this issue? Do we think their emotions, their loss is not relevant to this debate?"

"So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day in Washington," he added.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...lies-as-props/
-





What a crybaby.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by Raiderhader

I don't agree with what I have to do now. I already havit ib black and white that I have a right to own and carry firearms. The Constitution acknowledges this right.

Calling the government to get their ok for me to purchase one is at the very least redundant. At most, a complete overstepping of authority.

So do you practice civil disobedience and make sure not to follow the requirements or do you just go along with it?

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by jettio

So do you practice civil disobedience and make sure not to follow the requirements or do you just go along with it?

So besides increasing government control or laying the groundwork for confiscation, what exactly does me having to do a background check every time I purchase a new gun accomplish?

[jettio]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

So besides increasing government control or laying the groundwork for confiscation, what exactly does me having to do a background check every time I purchase a new gun accomplish?

It may be that some people become disqualified in between gun purchases. Most serious mental illness occurs in the early 20's. So somebody could have passed a background check before but then had a mental illness or committed a felony or a domestic violence misdemeanor.

You sound like somebody about to renounce your citizenship, under the current federal law you would not be able to possess a gun if you did that.

Anyway, a background check does not seem like that big a deal to me if they are done accurately and quickly.

If you think the government is laying the groundwork for confiscation then maybe you should stop posting stuff on the internet that would make it easier for them to find you.

Doesn't the government already know who has passed a background check and bought a gun?

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by jettio

It may be that some people become disqualified in between gun purchases. Most serious mental illness occurs in the early 20's. So somebody could have passed a background check before but then had a mental illness or committed a felony or a domestic violence misdemeanor.

You sound like somebody about to renounce your citizenship, under the current federal law you would not be able to possess a gun if you did that.

Anyway, a background check does not seem like that big a deal to me if they are done accurately and quickly.

If you think the government is laying the groundwork for confiscation then maybe you should stop posting stuff on the internet that would make it easier for them to find you.

Doesn't the government already know who has passed a background check and bought a gun?

What has the government ever done that can labeled as accurate or quick...let alone both.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

What has the government ever done that can labeled as accurate or quick...let alone both.

Desert Storm.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by La literatura

Desert Storm.

Nice try, that is still going on though.

[RedDread]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

Nice try, that is still going on though.

Damn, all outta rep for today.

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by jettio

It may be that some people become disqualified in between gun purchases. Most serious mental illness occurs in the early 20's. So somebody could have passed a background check before but then had a mental illness or committed a felony or a domestic violence misdemeanor.

Yeah there's no way they could just commit a crime with the weapons they already own.

Originally Posted by jettio

IYou sound like somebody about to renounce your citizenship, under the current federal law you would not be able to possess a gun if you did that.

You don't know a ****ing thing about me punk. I have done more to defend this country than you could even dream of.

Originally Posted by jettio

IAnyway, a background check does not seem like that big a deal to me if they are done accurately and quickly.

As said earlier, government and accurately/quickly do not play well together.

Originally Posted by jettio

IIf you think the government is laying the groundwork for confiscation then maybe you should stop posting stuff on the internet that would make it easier for them to find you.
Doesn't the government already know who has passed a background check and bought a gun?

Trust me, they have bigger fish to fry. They can start with holder and his selling guns to mexican drug cartels.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by jettio

Does the current background check system take away your rights?

That depends on how you interpret the phrase "shall not be infringed."

[Pawnmower]

No sir, we do not debate with emotions.

That's a basic ****ing logical error / fallacy.

I learned that as a God damn freshman.

Chile please

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by jettio

The point I am making is that the current system of background checks does not really take away your rights.

If you really read the bill and then contemplated how it might affect your rights, you might realize that you are exagerrating when you say that the shooting victims and their families are trying to take away your rights when they are advocating for changes that make it harder for crazy people to do mass shootings like the ones that affected them.

Yet, it would do nothing to prevent such incidents as we've seen from the strict gun control laws in Connecticut.

The Federal govt has NO authority to make more incremental infringements on this right until it's gone. Never forget, the folks like Obama are incrementalists exploiting emotion to ultimately bring us to that point. Don't trust politicians.

Let the states deal with their own laws reforming mental health, even though most of those shooters were in the hands of a mental health professional where they were given a certain class of drugs that have black box warnings for psychotic violence and suicide as a side effect.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by RedDread

So I take it you're a convicted felon or mentally insane?

That's not an argument.

[BucEyedPea]

[jettio]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

What has the government ever done that can labeled as accurate or quick...let alone both.

How about being a key player in winning World War II.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

Yeah there's no way they could just commit a crime with the weapons they already own.



You don't know a ****ing thing about me punk. I have done more to defend this country than you could even dream of.



As said earlier, government and accurately/quickly do not play well together.



Trust me, they have bigger fish to fry. They can start with holder and his selling guns to mexican drug cartels.

Well I did serve six years in the military which is really not that big a deal, but it does give me some perspective on what it must have been like for Americans of other generations who really had to deal with a lot tougher things than the prospect of having a background check for a firearms purchase.

You ought to actually learn some history before you start pissing and moaning about how tough you might have it when a law is proposed.

I am not sure why you have to go into full crybaby mode, it is not unreasonable to think that someone who posts paranoid nonsense about our government declaring war on its citizens might renounce his citizenship, and find some utopian place to live.

What great thing have you done for your country that makes you piss and moan so much?