There's an elegantly simple solution if you prefer France's.
Mega, now do you see?
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
There's an elegantly simple solution if you prefer France's.
I see you left out the first part of that provision. If you want to be a strict literalist, do it. If you don't, don't bitch when other people aren't.
What number would be too much, then?
You shot off your mouth, it blew up in your face, and now you're spinning and pretending not to understand, and it's disappointing. When other conservatives lose bets they don't welch, they are at least true to their word. Nice one, Welch.
Again, what number would be statistically significant? It's not a trick question. You're really at your best when you don't get taken off the herd-think. I guess we're done with the second amendment, too....
So I'm clear - FBI failed to keep this guy from buying his weapons by properly tagging him? If not then, "tagging" him a problem would have done what?
1. Significant for me to what? To ban guns? The number doesn't exist because it won't change anything and I would actually feel less safe.
2. I'd rather live in America where I have the right to bear arms and know that I am 250% more likely to be struck by lightning than be murdered by a gun.
Wait, what?
Perp in this case was natural born citizen radicalized via the interwebs. He was "tagged" as a POI but due to the nonexistent background checks legally obtained an AR and handgun.
How does that in any way fit your scenario?
Do you think this POS should have been able to legally purchase his armaments?
Well one would assume that's open to debate. Sorry, I'm not an FBI lawyer so I don't have specifics.
Don't give a f*ck about France. We are not France. Our firearm death rate beyond gangbangers and suicides are odds anyone would take on anything.
Did your bottom lip stick out when you wrote that? Don't care 'bout no lurnin' or stisticks. So back out their most criminal element and recompute...
Neutered by the much beloved NRA - underfunded by the much beloved Congress.
You do know what a "default proceed" is don't you?
Well @HighStickHarry you do have to admit, he's an expert at shooting his mouth off and having it blow up in his face (....this thread for example...). Might have to concede he is the expert on Internet crawfishing.
As a strong advocate for 2nd Amendment rights - should this POS have been able to legally buy weapons (based on the limited info we have)?
How many more firearm victims in U.S. vs. other civilized countries would make you think it's statistically significant enough to adjust our gun policy? Ok, if not per one hundred thousand, then overall deaths, or whatever you want.
Hint: There is no number. It doesn't matter how many people die, and you're criticizing a statistical analysis simply because it's a statistical analysis You like losers having the ability to f&#@ up so many lives.
Given what we know now, he never would've been able to clear 3 different weapons licenses or get off the terror watch list, and he probably will prove to have been diagnosed at some point as the right mix of mentally ill. So no.
This guy literally cheered during 9/11. He stalked a coworker who tried to turn him in and had to quit his job to flee him.
It wasn't hard to screen this guy. What the hell are you fishing for?
And this is what happens with basic, common sense questions. Sociopaths are
You want to confiscate guns. You hate liberty. Fu^##* liberal.
You want to confiscate guns. You hate liberty. Fu^##* liberal.
You sound like a child arguing how reindeer can fly. It's embarrassing.
What am I "fishing for"? Some semblance of common sense and decency.
Is it worthwhile to address how and why this guy slipped through the system?
It's a sad deal. I wish he and cup had been raised differently but some people are allowed to poison their children and these two got a double dose from what I've read.
Sorry. Assumed you were trying to set up some kind of punchline. Go ahead and address my answer.
I want an accounting of how this guy got his guns. I want NICS grants funded as approved in 2007. I want the FBI to answer for why a POI isn't sufficient for denying a purchase...
Yes, that's a debate worth having.
Would he have slipped through the cracks in 1998 when the FBI started the background checks or has political correctness affected the process in any way in your opinion?
I agree. My concern is that it's clearly possible to be wrongly considered a POI so I would want an established path for an innocent person to earn that right back.
Interesting:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/n...nd-checks-are-denied-or-delayed#disablemobile
Would you support expanding this list?
POI would have to be nailed down but given no other way to identify terror threats that has to be included...
Potentially, sure. But some of the existing ones are already wonky as worded.
Gotta love the incorporation doctrine. I don't think anyone could ever convince me that McDonald v. City of Chicago was a good decision. This is a state issue. If the majority of residents of Chicago want to ban guns and the Illinois Constitution doesn't explicitly protect the right (it doesn't) have at it. If it did amend it to your liking. I don't live there, none of my business.
This is a prime example of what's wrong with this damned country. People from areas outside of a state trying to use the federal government to legislate their views on everyone else.
The considerations for allowing gun ownership cannot be subjective, in my opinion.
He had employment screenings that appear to be the involved type required for the work he did. The media has made many a reference to that. What does the NRA have to do with those? If somebody can get through those, they won't show up on a firearm check.
Of course I know what default proceed is. Not a fan and think the loophole should be closed. My best friend is one of the largest gun dealers in OK and he doesn't agree with it either. But what does default proceed have to do with this islamic dirt bag? Did he get his guns because of it?
How exactly can background checks be made more effective? Should we allow access to our medical records? Who's the person with the expertise making those decisions? Do we perform reference reviews PD hiring style? Polygraphs? MMPI and CPI examination?
I have a theory. I think his girlfriend posts on his account sometimes.
How exactly did the terrorists get their AK47 rifles in France to pull off their attacks (Paris, Charlie Hebdo)? They didn't get them legally.
What you fail to include in your glee to try to compare (stupidly I might add) France and the US (never mind Chicago etc) is the availability of black market guns from eastern Europe that are readily available to buy. In fact, the French government believes there are more than double the amount of illegal guns compared to legal guns.
Eastern Europe and its gun contributions to France sound eerily familiar to a neighbor the US has that has ZERO problems exporting tons of drugs and millions of people across our porous border, including terrorist types of late. Just as was proven in France, if the terrorists want guns to kill, they'll get the guns.
I'm afraid your fantasy of magical unicorns and cotton candy trees won't happen even if guns are banned.
Sorry for the reality Super Singular Chart Guy/Gal.
