Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
    That's not federal law bro. It's state by state. Before posting click bait headlines you should know the law. What's legal in one state is not necessarily legal in other states.
    It is federal law bro. The Feds set the minimum that has to be done, states can require more so long as it doesn't infringe on the 2nd Amendment. Which is why individual states can close the gun show loophole but not end background checks at licensed dealers.

  2. #22
    Just pray harder!

    Pray for the victims, pray for the first responders, but don't you dare pray for them dirty Muslims!

    If you pray hard enough, Jesus will protect your place of work, your kid's school, and every public place you ever go to from ever being the scene of a mass shooting.

    You just got to pray hard enough bro.

    The victims of this? (and the dozens of others) Probably atheists. Or democrats. Same thing right? They were probably also poor people on welfare. Ewww.

    Obviously didn't pray hard enough, or to the right God.

    After all, if they are one of the good ones - conservative Christian Republicans, and their Jesus prayer cloak of invincibility fails them, well their death just means they are going to Heaven anyway right? So what's the big fucking deal?

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    It is federal law bro. The Feds set the minimum that has to be done, states can require more so long as it doesn't infringe on the 2nd Amendment. Which is why individual states can close the gun show loophole but not end background checks at licensed dealers.
    No, it's not. Private purchase laws are not federal. You really should shut up when you don't know what you are talking about. This whole thread is about going to gun shows and buying from private parties. It's in the original post. Those laws and restrictions are by STATE. Go read the law or just remain quiet.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    Really?
    From the FBI's page.


    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/nsb/tsc...sked-questions
    So what is the issue with the word "suspect"?
    Yeah, suspect. Aka, someone who hasn't actually done any terrorism. If they had already participated in the joys of terrorism, they wouldn't be called suspects. They would be called detainees.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Vago View Post
    So a bi-partisan group introduced the bill?
    2 Republicans, 43 Democrats as sponsor/co-sponsors for the bill.

    Republicans are in charge it is dying in committee, what do you call it?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0258edb31b652

  6. #26
    Titan Tierbook's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Charleston SC
    Posts
    13,870
    If I remember correctly the reason for this is that, strictly speaking, anyone can be a terrorist for looking at something so minor as the wrong thing on the internet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    I'd never compare him to Hitler, Hitler was actually well educated, and by all accounts pretty intelligent.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
    No, it's not. Private purchase laws are not federal. You really should shut up when you don't know what you are talking about. This whole thread is about going to gun shows and buying from private parties. It's in the original post. Those laws and restrictions are by STATE. Go read the law or just remain quiet.
    You should really be more informed before you tell someone to shut up.

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...3hr1025enr.pdf

  8. #28
    You guys have inadvertently stumbled upon something truly great. If we can assume anyone labeled as a suspect either did commit, or will commit a crime, we can just put them in jail right off the bat! Think of the money we will save on those pesky trials and all those lawyers!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Tierbook View Post
    If I remember correctly the reason for this is that, strictly speaking, anyone can be a terrorist for looking at something so minor as the wrong thing on the internet.
    No, you won't be put on just for visiting a website.

    An individual is included in the Terrorist Screening Database when there is a reasonable
    suspicion that the person is a known or suspected terrorist. To meet the reasonable suspicion
    standard, nominating agencies must rely upon articulable intelligence or information which,
    taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrants a determination
    that an individual is known or suspected to be or have been knowingly engaged in conduct
    constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism or terrorist activities. Based on
    the totality of the circumstances, a nominating agency must provide an objective factual basis
    to believe an individual is a known or suspected terrorist.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpo...om-buying-guns



    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...m-buying-guns/



    You want reasonable gun control solutions? Here's one. It's just the majority party is blocking it.
    do you know what can put you on the list? there is no due process there is no judge or jury that looks at any evidence that justifies you getting put on that list. a simple tip from who ever with no investigation can put you on the list. hell Ted Kennedy was put on a watch list

    if you going to take away a constitutional right there better be due process not just the decision of law enforcement it needs to go through the courts evidence needs to be presented and argued to a judge or jury that justifies taking away a constitutional right

    the argument from republicans if getting put on the list takes away a constitutional right the process that gets you on the list needs to be changed

    you do believe in due process don't you?
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2015-12-03 at 09:28 PM.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
    No, it's not. Private purchase laws are not federal. You really should shut up when you don't know what you are talking about. This whole thread is about going to gun shows and buying from private parties. It's in the original post. Those laws and restrictions are by STATE. Go read the law or just remain quiet.
    Where the hell did you get private purchases? This is about licensed dealer purchases.

  12. #32
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,144
    I understand the argument against it. For rights to be taken away, due process has to be followed. I don't brink the list follows due process, and acts more like an internal memo

  13. #33
    Apparently YOU can't read. It says FFL. That is not private purchase. That is public. Seriously I don't think I can go any further with some one so dense.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    I understand the argument against it. For rights to be taken away, due process has to be followed. I don't brink the list follows due process, and acts more like an internal memo
    There is an appeals process. You get due process.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
    Apparently YOU can't read. It says FFL. That is not private purchase. That is public. Seriously I don't think I can go any further with some one so dense.
    Again where the hell are you getting private purchases? I never once mentioned it, nor do the stories.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    2 Republicans, 43 Democrats as sponsor/co-sponsors for the bill.

    Republicans are in charge it is dying in committee, what do you call it?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0258edb31b652
    So, a bi-partisan group...gotcha

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    Where the hell did you get private purchases? This is about licensed dealer purchases.
    The original post says encouraged to go to gun convention. In gun shows (and this is how I know you obviously have never been to one) you are NOT required to do a background check in my state to PRIVATELY transfer ownership of a firearm. You are the one who needs to keep up. The guys comments are in reference to private party transfer. Once again NOT public. Different laws different regulations. Once again. Quiet yourself.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Vago View Post
    So, a bi-partisan group...gotcha
    So who has kept it from a floor vote?

  18. #38
    Moderator Crissi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    32,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    There is an appeals process. You get due process.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Again where the hell are you getting private purchases? I never once mentioned it, nor do the stories.
    If you are put on it without being able to contest it as its happening, I wouldn't count that as due process. It's like getting a guilty verdict without being able to prove you're not at trial, and then appealing once you found out about it
    Last edited by Crissi; 2015-12-03 at 09:29 PM.

  19. #39
    Pit Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    So the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security are "leftist groups"?
    When the president leans left and appoints like-minded people.....
    “I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: ‘O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.’ And God granted it.” -- Voltaire

    "He who awaits much can expect little" -- Gabriel Garcia Marquez

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
    The original post says encouraged to go to gun convention. In gun shows (and this is how I know you obviously have never been to one) you are NOT required to do a background check in my state to PRIVATELY transfer ownership of a firearm. You are the one who needs to keep up. The guys comments are in reference to private party transfer. Once again NOT public. Different laws different regulations. Once again. Quiet yourself.
    The article is about how even with a check revealing that you are on the watchlist you can still make the purchase. Also there are plenty of FFLs at gun shows who DO have to perform checks. Also there is nothing stopping the feds from closing the gun show loophole, they just haven't. The discussion was on federal laws that could be passed. So again, what is your point?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •