Bernie is a idiot and what he says is treason, the second amendment is the right of the people to bear arms the same arms the military has that is the whole point! how can their be a militia without military arms? DUH!
I will agree that the NRA does not represent me in fact I am not even a member IMO they waste to much money begging the members for more money.
Common sense dictates that you know that criminals will always have illegal guns because they are criminals got it? and i also believe if we were much harder on criminals that use a gun in a crime would lead to less gun crime but there is no way you can have a mental test to qualify for a gun purchase I mean who makes up this test are they pro gun or anti gun what questions do you ask everyone has bad days or feels depressed about something are you then disqualified? folks you have to use common sense.
Which "well organized militia" do you belong to?
I don't belong to any militia which one do you belong too? BUT i have the right to if I choose to just as you do and like the right to free speech which I am using right now I choose to keep the right to bear arms you may not care and that is your right .
P. S. that was really a dumb question...... because it has nothing to do with gun control it is just another attempt to bait someone into a argument which I won't do...
No, it wasn't a dumb question because the second amendment clearly uses the words "a well regulated militia". And you are a proud gun owner who believes in the second amendment. Apparently you forgot that part.
_______________________________________________________________________
Stupid baiting question.
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed American Citizens individual right to own and bear arms.
Bernie is a idiot and what he says is treason, the second amendment is the right of the people to bear arms the same arms the military has that is the whole point! how can their be a militia without military arms? DUH!
I will agree that the NRA does not represent me in fact I am not even a member IMO they waste to much money begging the members for more money.
Common sense dictates that you know that criminals will always have illegal guns because they are criminals got it? and i also believe if we were much harder on criminals that use a gun in a crime would lead to less gun crime but there is no way you can have a mental test to qualify for a gun purchase I mean who makes up this test are they pro gun or anti gun what questions do you ask everyone has bad days or feels depressed about something are you then disqualified? folks you have to use common sense.
Which "well organized militia" do you belong to?
I don't belong to any militia which one do you belong too? BUT i have the right to if I choose to just as you do and like the right to free speech which I am using right now I choose to keep the right to bear arms you may not care and that is your right .
P. S. that was really a dumb question...... because it has nothing to do with gun control it is just another attempt to bait someone into a argument which I won't do...
No, it wasn't a dumb question because the second amendment clearly uses the words "a well regulated militia". And you are a proud gun owner who believes in the second amendment. Apparently you forgot that part.
_______________________________________________________________________
Stupid baiting question.
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed American Citizens individual right to own and bear arms.
The Supreme Court also allows free speech. Which explains why you are allowed to spew your simpleton garbage. 😛
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
From Why does NRA allow guns for terrorists?
Yes, this is exactly how dummies view gun control. Thanks for making my point, dummy.
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
_______________________________________________________________________
Man you didn’t have to go far to find that piece of crap. Wheeler is a far-left whack-job and his opinion is nothing more than an attack the Republicans editorial, and published by CNN aka Clinton News Network.
Did you note that the writer offers no solution, did not say specifically what “gun control” legislation he wants?
Typical left-wing hit job. Accuse the Republicans of doing nothing (exactly what the Democrats are doing; nothing) but offer no ideas on how to stop the gun violence, no specifics as to how they propose to restrict the citizen’s 2nd amendment rights or how they would stop terrorism.
Just another empty “gun-control” useless opinion.
The NRA does not "allow" guns for terrorists. That is the liberal's lie.
President Bush, The NRA and Congressional Republicans offered a bill that would have closed the so-called terrorist loophole. Harry Reid refused to even allow the bill to be discussed in the Senate let alone be voted on.
Pres. Bush and the Republicans tried to get the job done, Harry Reid and The Democrats killed it.
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
_______________________________________________________________________
Man you didn’t have to go far to find that piece of crap. Wheeler is a far-left whack-job and his opinion is nothing more than an attack the Republicans editorial, and published by CNN aka Clinton News Network.
Did you note that the writer offers no solution, did not say specifically what “gun control” legislation he wants?
Typical left-wing hit job. Accuse the Republicans of doing nothing (exactly what the Democrats are doing; nothing) but offer no ideas on how to stop the gun violence, no specifics as to how they propose to restrict the citizen’s 2nd amendment rights or how they would stop terrorism.
Just another empty “gun-control” useless opinion.
The NRA does not "allow" guns for terrorists. That is the liberal's lie.
President Bush, The NRA and Congressional Republicans offered a bill that would have closed the so-called terrorist loophole. Harry Reid refused to even allow the bill to be discussed in the Senate let alone be voted on.Pres. Bush and the Republicans tried to get the job done, Harry Reid and The Democrats killed it.
Wrong. This happened today. Here is a link that you won't read. BTW, it isn't an opinion piece, it is a story on a Senate vote taken today.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/senate-gop-votes-terrorist-gun-bill-article-1.2454448
Wrong. This happened today. Here is a link that you won't read. BTW, it isn't an opinion piece, it is a story on a Senate vote taken today.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/senate-gop-votes-terrorist-gun-bil l-article-1.2454448
Well, there you go. Do you need any more information as to who is blocking gun control legislation? Thanks for posting, jkeller.
[Edited on 12/4/2015 by robslob]
We can't keep guns from thugs.
Can we keep them away from people in San Bernadino, Ca. who "Might have been radicalized"?
since they were bought legally, tougher background checks, psychological exams may have uncovered some red flags.
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
_______________________________________________________________________
Man you didn’t have to go far to find that piece of crap. Wheeler is a far-left whack-job and his opinion is nothing more than an attack the Republicans editorial, and published by CNN aka Clinton News Network.
Did you note that the writer offers no solution, did not say specifically what “gun control” legislation he wants?
Typical left-wing hit job. Accuse the Republicans of doing nothing (exactly what the Democrats are doing; nothing) but offer no ideas on how to stop the gun violence, no specifics as to how they propose to restrict the citizen’s 2nd amendment rights or how they would stop terrorism.
Just another empty “gun-control” useless opinion.
The NRA does not "allow" guns for terrorists. That is the liberal's lie.
President Bush, The NRA and Congressional Republicans offered a bill that would have closed the so-called terrorist loophole. Harry Reid refused to even allow the bill to be discussed in the Senate let alone be voted on.Pres. Bush and the Republicans tried to get the job done, Harry Reid and The Democrats killed it.
Because God forbid that congress actually does anything...
[Edited on 12/4/2015 by gondicar]
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
The articles you posted decry that the Republicans are allowing terrorists to legally purchase firearms, without giving the reason they are blocking the legislation.
The reason these people on the "watch list" successfully purchased these firearms is that they filled out the paperwork correctly and passed the background check. In other words, they were law abiding people who followed the rules, had no criminal record, were not under any type of federal investigation, and had every LEGAL RIGHT to purchase the firearms.
The "Watch list" contains names placed there,in error, of thousands of law abiding citizens with no ties to terror groups. One most prominent name that I remember is Senator Ted Kennedy placed on the no-fly list.
Would you deny Ted Kennedy the right to purchase a firearm if he chose to do so (not that I think he would)?
Let's get the lists cleaned up, clear out the ones placed there in error, and then we'll see how the legislation goes through.
It's sad when we have weekly mass shootings, and Americans turn on each other in the aftermath. There are many causes for these atrocities, and the blame can be spread all around politically and socially. To believe the blame falls squarely on the shoulders 1 issue, person, or group, is beyond foolish and irresponsible. If you are one of those people, you need to take a look in the mirror. It's not the fault of Obama, republicans, or the NRA, mental health, racism, etc. Its all of those things. So there's no sense in taking sides and blaming the other...not on gun control or terrorism. Casting blame is a dangerous and devastating weapon to use on somebody, so we should all be mindful before doing so, especially when blaming an American for Islamic terrorism or mass bloodshed....absolutely dispicable. We would all be offended if someone accused us of horrific violence. The trolls will continue to do so and expose themselves as such. If it bothers you when liberals do it or conservatives do it, then dont do it yourself!
good post BB -- trying to make mass murder a singular political thing is just plain boneheaded
as you said, casting blame is dangerous and devastating -- it's a well known tool of totalitarianism, communism, facism -- Destroy From The Inside -- one to the other -- seriously submitted, the Twilight Zone show The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street, is about this very thing
The cartoon says it well too -- whatever 'legislation' goes through, it will have the same effect -- nil
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
The articles you posted decry that the Republicans are allowing terrorists to legally purchase firearms, without giving the reason they are blocking the legislation.
The reason these people on the "watch list" successfully purchased these firearms is that they filled out the paperwork correctly and passed the background check. In other words, they were law abiding people who followed the rules, had no criminal record, were not under any type of federal investigation, and had every LEGAL RIGHT to purchase the firearms.
The "Watch list" contains names placed there,in error, of thousands of law abiding citizens with no ties to terror groups. One most prominent name that I remember is Senator Ted Kennedy placed on the no-fly list.
Would you deny Ted Kennedy the right to purchase a firearm if he chose to do so (not that I think he would)?Let's get the lists cleaned up, clear out the ones placed there in error, and then we'll see how the legislation goes through.
Jerry, I have no doubt that there are people on the terror watch lists that are placed there in error. Just like there are people who have arrest records and even convictions who were actually not guilty. No system is going to be perfect. But you are missing the point. The vast majority of people on those lists are there for legit reasons and they aren't even allowed to board a commercial flight even if they submit to a cavity search because of it, yet there is nothing preventing them from purchasing a firearm. Would it have prevented what happened in San Bernadino? Probably not as Syed Farook was not on any watch list. In fact, it appears that he was a "law abiding citizen" right up until the point where he shot a roomful of people. Nonetheless, it is a loophole that should be closed yet the NRA and their water-carrying reps in Congress won't let that happen. It is shameful, IMO.
Casting blame is a dangerous and devastating weapon to use on somebody, so we should all be mindful before doing so, especially when blaming an American for Islamic terrorism or mass bloodshed....absolutely dispicable.
And if it turns out to be Terrorism?
Then blame the shooters, not some other American, like the President. To blame Obama or any other American for the atrocities of terrorists, whether foreign or domestic, is despicable IMO, same as blaming Bush for 911.
Then blame the shooters, not some other American, like the President. To blame Obama or any other American for the atrocities of terrorists, whether foreign or domestic, is despicable IMO, same as blaming Bush for 911.
especially when blaming an American for Islamic terrorism or mass bloodshed.
I am blaming the shooters, especially if they're linked to ISIS. How did they acquire their weapons?...I'll wager Illegally.
BigV, the guns were purchased legally, hence why I believe stronger background checks and a psychological exam at time of purchase could have produced a red flag.
BigV, the guns were purchased legally, hence why I believe stronger background checks and a psychological exam at time of purchase could have produced a red flag.
Interesting that you raise the issue of a "red flag" in that neighbors were suspicious, but failed to report it out of fear of being labeled racist bigots or profilers.
Precisely the reason why we can't leave these types of responsibilities in the hands of the general public. Precisely the reason why we need psychological exams by pros who know how to detect problems.
Furthermore, if the neighbors noticed suspicious behaviors, should they have been allowed to buy guns in the first place? There are so many failures all around.
[Edited on 12/4/2015 by BoytonBrother]
A government psychological test to buy a firearm? In this climate?
Ah, no.
Everyone keeps forgetting that the last time the FBI tried to count they were confident that there were over 500 million guns in America. 330 million people live here.
Any restrictions on new purchases doesn't address that.
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
The articles you posted decry that the Republicans are allowing terrorists to legally purchase firearms, without giving the reason they are blocking the legislation.
The reason these people on the "watch list" successfully purchased these firearms is that they filled out the paperwork correctly and passed the background check. In other words, they were law abiding people who followed the rules, had no criminal record, were not under any type of federal investigation, and had every LEGAL RIGHT to purchase the firearms.
The "Watch list" contains names placed there,in error, of thousands of law abiding citizens with no ties to terror groups. One most prominent name that I remember is Senator Ted Kennedy placed on the no-fly list.
Would you deny Ted Kennedy the right to purchase a firearm if he chose to do so (not that I think he would)?Let's get the lists cleaned up, clear out the ones placed there in error, and then we'll see how the legislation goes through.
The san bernadino shooter was an an american citizen, not on any watch list,purchased his guns legally. also I don't think ted kennedy will be purchasing a firearm, him being dead and all.
I wouldn't think of Kennedy purchasing a firearm while he was alive, that's why I didn't think he would, being the anti-gunner that he was. Other than that, what does the rest of your response have to do with the discussion on the articles?
The latest mind-numbing puzzle: The GOP is blocking a law that would prevent known and suspected terrorists from buying guns.
This is not just a what-if scenario. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office recently released a report showing that from 2004 to 2014, people on terrorism watch lists successfully purchased guns no fewer than 2,043 times.
Yes, you read that right.
There are 700,000 people on the terrorist watch list, and when these people tried to legally purchase guns, they had a success rate of 91%.
"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the GAO warned back in 2010.
This situation has a simple solution: Pass a law that stops known and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
In fact, just such a bill was introduced earlier this year, and it has a pretty straightforward name: The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015. It was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, and Rep. Peter King, R-New York.
Can you guess which villain defeated the bill? I'll give you a hint: The initials are NRA.
"It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction," King told the New York Daily News. "The National Rifle Association is strongly opposed to it, and the fact is we have only a handful of Republican co-sponsors."
That's right. The National Rifle Association is so powerful that it can ensure that common-sense bills keeping guns away from potential terrorists are blocked in Congress.
In objecting to versions of the bill, the NRA used the same worn-out rhetoric they've been using for decades; namely, passing such a law won't stop criminals from illegally acquiring guns.
There is no law that would stop all criminals from ever using a gun. But we need every tool possible to fight gun violence, especially in an era when mass shootings have become a regular occurrence and when terrorists use guns as their weapon of choice.
When George W. Bush was president, he was one of those Republicans who often ignored calls for a reality check. But even he understood the need to fix this loophole in the law. In 2007, his administration proposed the legislation, but by the time it was introduced two years later, the NRA called up its buddies in Congress and stopped the bill.
The articles you posted decry that the Republicans are allowing terrorists to legally purchase firearms, without giving the reason they are blocking the legislation.
The reason these people on the "watch list" successfully purchased these firearms is that they filled out the paperwork correctly and passed the background check. In other words, they were law abiding people who followed the rules, had no criminal record, were not under any type of federal investigation, and had every LEGAL RIGHT to purchase the firearms.
The "Watch list" contains names placed there,in error, of thousands of law abiding citizens with no ties to terror groups. One most prominent name that I remember is Senator Ted Kennedy placed on the no-fly list.
Would you deny Ted Kennedy the right to purchase a firearm if he chose to do so (not that I think he would)?Let's get the lists cleaned up, clear out the ones placed there in error, and then we'll see how the legislation goes through.
Jerry, I have no doubt that there are people on the terror watch lists that are placed there in error. Just like there are people who have arrest records and even convictions who were actually not guilty. No system is going to be perfect. But you are missing the point. The vast majority of people on those lists are there for legit reasons and they aren't even allowed to board a commercial flight even if they submit to a cavity search because of it, yet there is nothing preventing them from purchasing a firearm. Would it have prevented what happened in San Bernadino? Probably not as Syed Farook was not on any watch list. In fact, it appears that he was a "law abiding citizen" right up until the point where he shot a roomful of people. Nonetheless, it is a loophole that should be closed yet the NRA and their water-carrying reps in Congress won't let that happen. It is shameful, IMO.
The point is that the ones on the watch list who purchased firearms, did so legally, passed the background checks and all the hoops and traps placed in front of us law abiding citizens who wish to purchase firearms by state and federal regulation and laws.
Your statement about him being a law abiding citizen up till he committed the murders, every person is a law abiding citizen until they commit a crime.
all the hoops and traps placed in front of us law abiding citizens who wish to purchase firearms by state and federal regulation and laws.
You consider the gun purchasing process "hoops and traps"? How complicated is it in your state to buy a gun?
all the hoops and traps placed in front of us law abiding citizens who wish to purchase firearms by state and federal regulation and laws.
You consider the gun purchasing process "hoops and traps"? How complicated is it in your state to buy a gun?
___________________________________________________________________________
Those "hoops and traps" are what politicians have put in place to limit the ability for law abiding citizens to protect themselves and are ineffective against criminals who do the vast majority of gun violence.
The so-called “background check” system does not work.
The State Department, which gave the visa to the Islamic Extremist Terrorist, claims that they did a complete and thorough background check on Tashfeen Malik who pledged her allegiance to ISIS and along with her husband killed 14 in San Bernadino.
This is the same “thorough” background check the Obama administration says will be used to vet the Syrian refugees.
After the Charleston Church shooting the FBI director admitted that the background check system failed.
Let’s see if Obama, when he whips out his pen on this useless order, includes fixing the failed background check system.
all the hoops and traps placed in front of us law abiding citizens who wish to purchase firearms by state and federal regulation and laws.
You consider the gun purchasing process "hoops and traps"? How complicated is it in your state to buy a gun?
About the same as anywhere else in the US. I actually remember being able to mail order rifles and shotguns through the Sears catalog, delivered right to your door.
all the hoops and traps placed in front of us law abiding citizens who wish to purchase firearms by state and federal regulation and laws.
You consider the gun purchasing process "hoops and traps"? How complicated is it in your state to buy a gun?
___________________________________________________________________________
Those "hoops and traps" are what politicians have put in place to limit the ability for law abiding citizens to protect themselves and are ineffective against criminals who do the vast majority of gun violence.
The so-called “background check” system does not work.
The State Department, which gave the visa to the Islamic Extremist Terrorist, claims that they did a complete and thorough background check on Tashfeen Malik who pledged her allegiance to ISIS and along with her husband killed 14 in San Bernadino.
This is the same “thorough” background check the Obama administration says will be used to vet the Syrian refugees.
After the Charleston Church shooting the FBI director admitted that the background check system failed.
Let’s see if Obama, when he whips out his pen on this useless order, includes fixing the failed background check system.
You are mixing up a lot of issues. In both the Charleston and San Bernardino cases the purchaser of firearms was a law abiding citizen. No formal background check will identify this type of terrorist. One might say that the true motivations of this type of person are impossible to vet so they should not be allowed to purchase a gun.
In the San Bernardino case a law abiding citizen applied for a visa for his fiance to come to the US. The US party in this relationship also has rights that are ironically being trampled on by people who want to preserve their own rights to purchase weapons by limiting background checks.
One possible solution that Senator Risch suggested for the marriage visa was to engage in more community type of research on individuals. This could be modified for gun owners in some way. Community militias could be created and this would expose individual gun owners to other gun owners and they could report any psychologically problematic gun owners to the authorities for further screening. There are all sorts of ways to create monitoring groups in communities to help identify individuals. This might be more effective than the formal individual interview.
