Gun Control

[SmarterthanYou]

Which is the most likely source of the weapons to begin with.

But first you begin with a false premise, that isn't the action they are taking. It is firstly the excuse they are going to use to put the military on the border where they will work "hand in hand" with the current Mexican Government to "stop the trafficking of weapons" that are "causing this".

We know that it is the first step because they have directly stated so.

This is a false premise, and that is the point of this thread. IMO, this administration is using this to attempt to "alarm" people into thinking legal weapons sales are somehow causing this.

By placing that many federal agents along the border to prevent these 'gun runs', one also has to wonder how long it will be before the patriot act is used to issue benchless warrants to raid 'suspected' arsenals in peoples homes.

all in the name of national security, of course.

 

[Bonestorm]

I'll let you looney tunes whip up you conspiracy theories amongst yourselves.

 

[Damocles]

I'll let you looney tunes whip up you conspiracy theories amongst yourselves.

Translation:

I'll maintain my careful ignorance so that I can later support any action taken by this Administration however illogical. I'll support that in my mind with a "mocking" of people I want to ignore, because they may give me information that I may actually see in implementation then I could no longer act in ignorance.

 

[Bonestorm]

Translation:

I'll maintain my careful ignorance so that I can later support any action taken by this Administration however illogical. I'll support that in my mind with a "mocking" of people I want to ignore, because they may give me information that I may actually see in implementation then I could no longer act in ignorance.

Actually, no. I would oppose any effort by the administration to attempt to impose additional gun control measures not authorized by Congress under the guise of national security.

I just think that such a scenario is quite far-fetched.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Actually, no. I would oppose any effort by the administration to attempt to impose additional gun control measures not authorized by Congress under the guise of national security.

I just think that such a scenario is quite far-fetched.

maybe you'll go back and read how I theorized this and stated that it's a concern of mine and not that I said 'this is what Obama will do'.

 

[Bonestorm]

maybe you'll go back and read how I theorized this and stated that it's a concern of mine and not that I said 'this is what Obama will do'.

I have no qualms with you, sir. I was talking mostly about Damocles who claimed that it "appears" that Obama was headed in this direction.

 

[uscitizen]

Gun control? It is really people control, Guns are just tools.
But then again so are many people.

 

[Damocles]

I have no qualms with you, sir. I was talking mostly about Damocles who claimed that it "appears" that Obama was headed in this direction.

I would treasure your opinion more if you had demonstrated an education level on the subject rather than an ignorance level. You don't bother to read or listen to another opinion different than yours or even travel along a logic path other than the one you've made up on false information...

"They are going to arm up the Mexican government," he says...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I have no qualms with you, sir. I was talking mostly about Damocles who claimed that it "appears" that Obama was headed in this direction.

great. thank you.

but it 'appears' that Damo is theorizing as well and by all appearances, what he and I discussed could be possible.

 

[Damocles]

great. thank you.

but it 'appears' that Damo is theorizing as well and by all appearances, what he and I discussed could be possible.

Yeah, but they use the fact that I come on and type something quickly,therefore sometimes not being uber-careful and taking five minutes to find the exact right word, to take what I say with robotic literalness that they expect to be overlooked in their own posts.

It isn't unreasonable to maintain some knowledge of people and make judgment on what they have written with that knowledge rather than to pretend that each post is made in a vacuum and must be read as if it is the only idea that was ever posted by a body...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It isn't unreasonable to maintain some knowledge of people and make judgment on what they have written with that knowledge rather than to pretend that each post is made in a vacuum and must be read as if it is the only idea that was ever posted by a body...

but where's the fun in doing that?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

65% of the american people do not believe the US governments claims that the drug cartels are getting their weapons from the US. I'm not worried about this congress implementing an AWB off of this border war with the drug runners. What I AM concerned about is having Rahm Emanuel trump up some sort of 'clear and present danger' crap to implement a ban using national security and bypassing congress altogether.

The southern states would take great offense to that kind of power play.

Bad justification. The rest of the nation is hardly in the mood, after the last 8 years, to even give a royal fuck about what southerner's want. They had their way for 8 years and fucked things up. Southerner's need to stand around a camp fire, shooting volley's and singing Dixie and leave running the government to people who know what they are doing. They don't have a hell of a lot of credibility at the moment.

I'd find a better one than that if I was you.

 

[Topspin]

They need to dissatm all you trigger happy rednecks.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Bad justification. The rest of the nation is hardly in the mood, after the last 8 years, to even give a royal fuck about what southerner's want. They had their way for 8 years and fucked things up. Southerner's need to stand around a camp fire, shooting volley's and singing Dixie and leave running the government to people who know what they are doing. They don't have a hell of a lot of credibility at the moment.

I'd find a better one than that if I was you.

well, i wasn't really going towards the political side of it. I was more referring to the southern states because they are on the front lines of this border crap.

If you want to make it political, i guess you can, but I don't see it gaining any traction there.

 

[Cancel3]

The action they are taking is to arm-up the Mexican government, not to disarm the American people.

If the position they are taking is that most of the weapons come from the US, they are not aiming at the Mexican government. They are claiming that american gun sources are responsible for the arming of mexican drug cartels. If that is what they truly believe, then they would be remiss, indeed negligent, if they did not try and address the ones actually responsible.

But their claims that they get their arms from american sources is either wrong or so badly skewed as to be a joke.

 

[Cancel3]

They need to dissatm all you trigger happy rednecks.

They can give it their best shot.

My guns will not be confiscated by the government.

 

[Good Luck]

I do not think Obama is quite so arrogant as to believe he could get away with using EO to instigate anything resembling the AWB. However, since "tracking" the firearms used by the Mexican drug cartel is the supposed problem, it certainly would grease the skids for HR 45, which has been waiting in the wings since January.


And Motley fuck: stuff your elitist liberal brain dead crap about the South up your oversized, reamed out anus.

 

[unphased]

For some reason we've been relatively silent on a subject that is going to have large repercussions and very soon.

Obama, the Campaigner in Chief, during his campaign speech the other day (cleverly disguised as a 'press conference'), mentioned that the US is pretty much at fault for giving guns to the Narco Traficantes in Mexico. Hillary has been seen going about suggesting the same thing, as well as some others in his administration.

This is spurious and weak for several reasons.

I'm sorry Damocles but I need to disagree at this point (btw why the hell doesn't your avatar have a sword hanging over his head.. faker ) . there is only ONE reason for this shell game, namely "shift the blame" ... it's not those that use guns to kill people's fault it's a shared responsibility with those that PRODUCE guns and not only that there's a third party involved here it also those that SELL guns that are at fault.

No personal responsibility for one's own actions... simply an ignorant way to run things IMHO.

Frankly I'm sick and tired of people shifting the blame for their own immoral actions (even when our president decides to become a proxy for them) unto others, aren't you?

So in conclusion and with all due respect to President Obama he simply has his head up his rear end on this issue... guns don't kill people, frickin' crazy, immoral people armed with guns kill people (but less people than automobiles and "legal" drugs, so isn't it a pity?)

 

[unphased]

My guns will not be confiscated by the government.

LOL, you forgot to add "I Hope" 'cause in case you hadn't noticed the federal government has a tendency to ignore constitutional protections that are inconvenient to whatever social, political or economic experiment they've arbitrarily decided to pursue at the moment.

They (the gub'ment) have hellfire missiles, apache attack helicopters, nukes and other equally destructive armaments and we (the people) have a random assortment of pop guns, guess who wins?

 

[Cancel3]

LOL, you forgot to add "I Hope" 'cause in case you hadn't noticed the federal government has a tendency to ignore constitutional protections that are inconvenient to whatever social, political or economic experiment they've arbitrarily decided to pursue at the moment.

They (the gub'ment) have hellfire missiles, apache attack helicopters, nukes and other equally destructive armaments and we (the people) have a random assortment of pop guns, guess who wins?

No, its not a hope thing. Burglaries happen all the time. The fact that a burglary at my home (they stole my entire gun collection and ammo stockpile!) happens to coincide with the passage of legislation allowing the confiscation of my now missing gun collection would be purely coincidental.