I believe our first ammendment is extended beyond newspapers, and our 2nd beyond cap and ball.
I think you hit on the head there. The enemy of peace is not these evil dirty racist right wing gun toting George Bush APAIC conservative FoxNews watching.....people. The real enemy here is physics.
You do realize the hypocrisy of this statement correct? You speak of the minority opposing the will of the majority, and yet 58% against would be the majority vs 42% for. I guess your next move is super majority or some shit, but that isn't what you said. If the minority couldn't stand up to the majority, we wouldn't have a lot of the currents things we have.
"Oh, wretched ephemeral race, children of chance and misery, why do you compel me to tell you what it would be more expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is utterly beyond your reach; not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. But the second best for you is --- to die soon." Silenus
Why am I not surprised that when finding themselves in the voting block minority, the pro-gun lobby pulls out the oppressed victim card?
Please tell us how extending background checks is oppression.
And just remember, the NRA and right wing pundits told their followers to ignore emotional fear driven arguments, so the evil liberals wanting to take your guns and background checks being a stepping stone argument should be ignored.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
This is very interesting, its like you made this post 3 months ago, on another page, discussing another topic, and you ended up having your words posted here.
I agree with you on the evil liberals wanting to take away your guns thing though, I try to ignore them all the time. And will continue to do so until the day they send someone to my house to collect my guns. And then I will tell then "Decklan said you wouldnt come for my guns!" And then they would go away, respecting the constitution and all that
Last edited by jugzilla; 2013-05-18 at 08:47 AM.
Ban slugs!What about slugs
I'll get some salt...
We weren't just talking about background checks. We were talking about a soft poll that 'shows' majority support for banning both semi automatic weapons and 'assault weapons' in addition to extending background checks.Please tell us how extending background checks is oppression.
Stop responding with straw men.
My Gaming Rig: Intel Core 2 quad q9650|ASUS P5G41-T M|2x4GB Supertalent DDR3 1333Mhz|Samsung 840 Evo 250GB|Fractal Design Integra R2 500w Bronze|ASUS Strix GTX 960 4GB|2x AOC e2770s 27" (one portrait, one landscape)|Bitfeenix Phenom Micro ATX
Don't hate my rig, there's nothing quite like the classics.
1. I wasn't comparing background checks to racism or anti-homosexuality. I was pointing out how dumb your statement was about the majority being hindered by the minority. Who the fuck is the majority anyway? Only 30% of Americans have a College degree. We have a roughly 10% high school drop out average. The "majority" doesn't automatically mean "correct." The "majority" support and have supported some pretty bullshit ideals, still do.
2. Lots of people in this thread and on this subject have supported banning guns. If this is a new concept to you, perhaps you should pick any three pages of this nearing 1000 page thread to find one of the hundred. Or, if you figure that would be too much work, turn on your television or radio to a news outlet for about 5 minutes currently. Just because YOU didn't doesn't mean it isn't also a current topic. Hell, Captain Slow even posted a Poll which "supports" the ban of a 80% of all firearms.
3. We can have a "discussion" about background checks when the follow can also happen...
A. Those pushing the matter can explain how a background check would have prevented New Town, Virginia Tech, Aurora, or the Gabby Gifford shooting. (Btw when doing so, please keep in mind that I've yet to see a 'background check' proposal that tackles patient rights issues or the fact that under the current setting only those put into the care of State run facilities can make it into the NCIS)
B. Some evidence or proof can be provided that the law does something without a Registry.
C. A presentation of conclusive numbers showing traced private sale firearms being sold to felons which would equate to the justification of such a measure and tax on the law abiding citizens.
I ask this because these are three very important parts and details which somehow fucking vanish in the conversation.
You guys do know that NICS call are made at gunshows, right? Even on C&R items.
Last edited by Deadvolcanoes; 2013-05-18 at 04:22 PM.
It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
Why do people keep saying this? It's not true.
Mind saying why you think this is true?
And they're vastly in the minority.
Anybody selling a significant amount of firearms is, by definition, in the business of selling firearms (unless they're selling their entire personal collection at once, which isn't going to happen often). Those people would need an FFL to sell and would be doing background checks, or else they're committing a whole string of federal felonies.
And at least for the version of the law that was voted down, it wouldn't have stopped the personal sellers from walking out to the parking lot and finishing the transaction outside the gun show as a legal sale without a background check.
"The difference between stupidity
and genius is that genius has its limits."
--Alexandre Dumas-fils
I'm inclined to agree, but do we have numbers to back it up?
Did you know that "if you are a federally licensed gun dealer and your license is revoked because you've engaged in misconduct ... your entire inventory under prevailing law is deemed your personal collection. You then can sell it free from any background checks." Talk about bad laws. Stupidity gets rewarded once again.Anybody selling a significant amount of firearms is, by definition, in the business of selling firearms (unless they're selling their entire personal collection at once, which isn't going to happen often). Those people would need an FFL to sell and would be doing background checks, or else they're committing a whole string of federal felonies.
It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
When someone suggests that as much as 40% of gun sales go through no checks, the onus is upon them to provide proof.
And so they tried, revealing the statement was a bunch of horseshit.
Exactly what would you suggest happen to those firearms?