Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Transferring them to another is lawful and even sale or barter of the guns to another is lawful unless the United States can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the firearm is intended to be used to commit a crime."
Nor should they be able to. These guns were being sold to drug dealers. Not hard to prove at all. They were not prosecuted because as I said, the government lost total control over this program.
Once again, you can not use Fast and Furious to prove anything. It's like arguing that Apollo 1 was proof that we couldn't get to the moon.
Your so dense. I posted the statistics and you continue to go on and on. The Feds don't even look into 94% of background check denials, let alone prosecute, they are not even considered, i.e. ignored. Now you want more laws to make the same thing illegal. The VP says we don't even have money to inforce the gun laws we have and you want another law to make the same thing illegal that wont be inforced. You are wasting everyone's time, your proposal will make no difference.
Making something that's HARD to prosecute into something that's EASIER to prosecute will make no difference? Really? We just let 19/20 straw purchasers walk free b/c of how hard it is to prosecute, so in your mind, making it easier to prosecute them would have made it 20/20 that walked free?
Nor should they be able to. These guns were being sold to drug dealers. Not hard to prove at all. They were not prosecuted because as I said, the government lost total control over this program.
Once again, you can not use Fast and Furious to prove anything. It's like arguing that Apollo 1 was proof that we couldn't get to the moon.
What part of "that's not illegal" do you not understand? And on top of that, the fact that you're arguing that it should be illegal MEANS YOU SUPPORT WHAT DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO DO!!
Just so you understand... 7 out of 8 Republicans on that Senate committee just voted against what you're saying should be done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roadrat
OK I'll bite and try to answer the OP's silly question. "Explain how the Feds are "ignoring" a law when they bring the case to prosecutors and prosecutors say "You don't have a case."
Obviously as federal agents they should have known that the so called "case's" they were bringing to the prosecutors were to weak to be taken seriously,but of course they new this and were just covering there *ss. F&F was a huge embarrassment to the Obama administration and they wanted it to go away as quickly as possible
Just how weak a case do you need to have when you have it documented that someone bought guns and sold them to cartels? Imagine if this were prescription drugs. Cops saw them buy and sell the drugs and brought that to prosecutors and prosecutors said that's not enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life
I guess I can play the copy and paste game as well.
Your so dense. I posted the statistics and you continue to go on and on. The Feds don't even look into 94% of background check denials, let alone prosecute, they are not even considered, i.e. ignored. Now you want more laws to make the same thing illegal. The VP says we don't even have money to inforce the gun laws we have and you want another law to make the same thing illegal that wont be inforced. You are wasting everyone's time, your proposal will make no difference.
Seeing how I already addressed that, and you haven't addressed my question to you... please explain how the Feds are "ignoring" a law when they bring the case to prosecutors and prosecutors say "You don't have a case"
Making something that's HARD to prosecute into something that's EASIER to prosecute will make no difference? Really? We just let 19/20 straw purchasers walk free b/c of how hard it is to prosecute, so in your mind, making it easier to prosecute them would have made it 20/20 that walked free?
How would you make it easier, would you just remove the burden of proof? We are all just guilty until proven inocent?
You take one indident about the mismanaged F&F program and act like that is reason across the board. I already have proven by stats that 94% of all denied background checks are not even looked into, and only 62 are actually prosecuted of the few thousands that are looked into. Read the study I linked to!!!
What part of "that's not illegal" do you not understand? And on top of that, the fact that you're arguing that it should be illegal MEANS YOU SUPPORT WHAT DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO DO!!
Just so you understand... 7 out of 8 Republicans on that Senate committee just voted against what you're saying should be done.
I'm not arguing that it should be illegal for people to sell their guns to others when they have no idea that they would be used illegally. I can do whatever I want with my personal items as long as I am not aware that I'm aiding a crime.
How would you make it easier, would you just remove the burden of proof? We are all just guilty until proven inocent?
You take one indident about the mismanaged F&F program and act like that is reason across the board. I already have proven by stats that 94% of all denied background checks are not even looked into, and only 62 are actually prosecuted of the few thousands that are looked into. Read the study I linked to!!!
How about making it flat out illegal to sell guns to or buy guns for someone that can't buy guns themselves?
Unless you think every one of those 72k denials should be in jail, you keep bringing up the study that has nothing to do w/ what we're talking about. You're complaining that not enough is done to investigate those denials, and letting it slide that not enough is being done to ARREST PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY COMMITTING A CRIME.
And so we don't lose track of where we are: #5 please explain how the Feds are "ignoring" a law when they bring the case to prosecutors and prosecutors say "You don't have a case"
I'm not arguing that it should be illegal for people to sell their guns to others when they have no idea that they would be used illegally. I can do whatever I want with my personal items as long as I am not aware that I'm aiding a crime.
And back pedal back pedal back pedal. So now you're opposed to prosecuting straw purchasers if they don't know a crime is going to be committed w/ that gun? Welcome to the thinking that allowed the massive loophole that the cartels took advantage of.
Cartel: "Hey... buy a couple of guns for me"
Random Joe "Ok."
Feds "Well Joe didn't know what they were for..."
And back pedal back pedal back pedal. So now you're opposed to prosecuting straw purchasers if they don't know a crime is going to be committed w/ that gun?
How is it a straw purchase if I am not aware that it will be used illegally? Why should it be illegal for me to purchase a gun for my underage son and give it to him?
How is it a straw purchase if I am not aware that it will be used illegally? Why should it be illegal for me to purchase a gun for my underage son and give it to him?
So then you have no grounds to complain about the 20 straw purchasers that bought guns for the cartels. They didn't know what the guns were going to be used for...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
