Background checks fails and Obama cries
- Thread starter Polydectes
- Start date
-
- Tags
- background checks cries fails obama
And yet 99.9% or people don't go around raping and pillaging. Try following your arguments to their logical conclusions before posting.
A string of foolish posts from you lately.
That isn't because of a law. Is the only thing keeping you from raping 10 girls a law?
Its logical to assume that people don't do things that are against the law, not because they fear punishment.
Your statement was far beyond foolish.
Without law society has no controls....and reaches Chaos.
Law does not stop criminal activity, and never will....but it defines it for those who wish to avoid it, lessen it, and hope to remove it.
New Law is a reaction to societal Ills....and serves a valuable purpose.
Law does not stop criminal activity, and never will....but it defines it for those who wish to avoid it, lessen it, and hope to remove it.
New Law is a reaction to societal Ills....and serves a valuable purpose.
They should make sense though, what you can't murder people because its harder for non criminals to buy guns?????
Yes. Had I been raised in a society without such laws (such as something medieval or pre-Classical) I'd either be dead, a brutalized slave or a bloodthirsty madman. Laws give society a sense of morality and prevent socially unacceptable acts from taking place 9 times out of 10. If you don't believe me, go to Somalia, Afghanistan, the non-tourist areas of Russia and Venezuela or the wilds of Colombia and see how long you last with your life and humanity intact. I give you a week, maybe 2 depending on where you end up.
Okay, I'd like a little clarification. I apologize if I sound stupid, but I haven't been keeping up with things. How were families used by Obama? Also, I DO agree with a good in depth background check and 3 days sounds fairly efficient. HOWEVER, a psych evaluation (probably useless, as I, a teenager can lie my way through one) might be an idea. I won't say if it's good or bad, it's just there. If there's anything that CAN be done to keep guns away from nutters, besides encroaching on our rights as US citizens, I say let's do it.
Effecting legal sale of guns only effects legal sale of guns, it will have no effect on illegal gun sale. We should do something about illegal sale of firearms, that makes sense
Why not do both?
Seems to me anything that could help, would be a good idea.
As far as Obama "Using" the families....when one considers that these parents who had just lost their children wanted to see something done, and Obama had the platform to allow them to be heard, I think it was pretty cool for him to let them vent and possibly heal a little bit.
This seems to be where much of the argument begins.
Everyone knows making it harder to buy guns will not stop Gun Violence...Hell, those pushing legislation regularly state exactly that.
Yet it is also quite clear it would "Lessen" this violence somewhat, and thus the legislation is trying...at least it is trying.
*Analogy*
Your daughter is at risk of being raped by bad guys, as is every woman on Earth. So, you avoid taking her to areas where the risk is increased because it makes logical sense to do what you can to keep her safe.
If you let her walk in a bad neighborhood with registered sex offenders, and a history of sexual attack you will be culpable is she is violated.
Many people have lost their children. They loved their children just as much as these families. But it would be hard to get their picture standing behind O'bama. It is plain he is stuck in "campaign" mode.
I have had a state trooper knock on my door to tell me my child is dead. And it takes a long time to know what you really want to do. What you see as "cool" I see as shameful. And Joe Biden has been chasing guns for over 30 years. He will take any opportunity for a knee jerk feel good law to be shoved through.
Your opinion is as accurate as my own, we simply view the actions differently. I do not see Obama allowing concerned parents who are in the National spotlight to voice opinion and grief. Though it is obvious he intemded to use them as a part of his campaign for gun control, they had the same goal in mind and expressed as much.
Likely, anyone who does not agree with the limits he attempted will view what transpired in a negative light and interpret is that way. Also likely would be those who oppose Obama for other reasons grasping the opportunity to debase him for virtually anything they can find.
I personally do not care for much of what this President does, nor did I much care for Bush, Clinton.....or almost every President in my lifetime.
But, I respected them, and tried not to make up things to bash them for....as they often provided ample opportunity without my getting "Creative".
Abridging our rights to make people feel better does nothing, out is no help. I don't think out is a good idea to put the burden on everybody.
A back ground check already exists, it was Eric holder that ignored it, Obama didn't fie him even though hundreds of people were killed by the guns that he okayed the sale of.
Perhaps of they weren't such complete hypocrites I would trust them.
And what would a more extensive background check find? It took the FBI ten minuets to see if I had any felonies. They can't know about my mental health, doctor patient confidentiality makes that impossible. Unless you think that someone that wants to buy a gun should give up that right. Which I personally find to be ridiculous. You should have to give up any rights of you haven't committed a crime, they are rights, not privileges.
It would only make it harder to legally get guns, it wouldn't effect illegally getting guns. I don't believe that 75% of people what to make it harder on non criminals and not effect criminals in the least.
I don't need to make up anything on any of them . The highest ranking elected official that I can say I respect is our county sheriff. I am sad to say I do not respect the president, the senate, or the congress. And our governor is nothing to take pride in either.
I see, so making it illegal to buy at a gun show or over the internet without a minimum background check is too inconvenient for legal owners, but would not set the same inconvenience on those trying to get one illegally....seriously?
I suppose we simply use differing forms of logic in reaching conclusions.
No, tecoyah, you don't understand, changing the law about person to person sales, that would close the gun show loop hole, making it only possible to trade with a gun dealer, licensed through the ATF. Only effects legal sales.
You can't possably enforce such a thing. You would have to hire a cop to follow around every gun owner to make sure they don't sell their guns to anybody. That is how criminals get them, making it illegal will only mean a criminal will have to break two laws to coming murder with a gun.
You aren't using any logic here. Lets t think logically for a moment. Making out harder to legally attain a gun doesn't have any effect on illegally attaining a gun, in fact it makes it more likely that guns used in crime are illegally attained.
Nothing stops a person from going and buying a gun who can legally buy one and then seeing it (under the table) to someone that can't. That is how criminals get guns. no law will affect that.
The law is benign because it is unenforceable. It relies on people to respect it, people who respect laws already obey them.
How does this measure help anything? If most guns used in crimes are attained illegally, how does making it harder to attain them legally change that?
Lets try this, I have a 9mm pistol that i purchased 15 years ago, how does making it illegal for me to sell it to joe blow crack dealer stop me from doing so? When I sell it to him, I have ground off serial numbers and there wasn't a cop in my pocket to stop me. And old JBCD (Joe blow crack dealer) payed me three times its purchase price.
That scenario just above is exactly how most criminals get guns, and since most murderers are criminals it will have little or no effect on the actual gun violence.
explain please how it would have an effect in it, i am dying to know.
It would have no effect on this scenario.
It very well may have an effect on many others though....again, it would not stop all scenarios, probably not even most. But, it might stop a few.....and what if one of those few was your sister?
Might? That suggests that it had no real effect. Lets quit with the desperation and get to the real problem that nobody wants to address and effectively eliminate most of it.
Similar threads
