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.
if someone is flagged by the FBI not once, butt TWICE, at the very least, he loses his right for ___ years to buy a gun. I can see once being a mistake, but not 2x.
I'm sure there will be more coming out about this in the days/weeks/months to come.
How about if you are being investigated by the FBI you also lose other rights, free speech, right to worship, right to say run for public office?
Do you really believe that our Constitutional rights should be at the whim of Government bureaucrats?
do you know a single thing about guns or gun laws? your post indicates that no is the answer.
here's a hint - there are THOUSANDS of gun laws already. AK47's are already illegal. I really wish you people would learn our current laws before commenting.
Sigh, "like" doesn't mean the same as, it means similar to.
I already know there are gun laws. My point was that we should review current gun laws, study in different locales/states the effect these laws have on those areas, and on a federal level implement additional tightening of restrictions, especially in regards to not allowing terroristic sympathizers to buy weapons "like" AK-47s, such as AR-15 and other assault rifles.
ETA: The NRA and people like you are preventing the common sense thinking on gun laws mentioned above. Any mention of restrictions draws from your ilk an illogical response. All sorts of products are reviewed and safety measures are put in place all the time to keep up with society and in response to situations that kill people on a mass scale. Guns should be no different.
How about if you are being investigated by the FBI you also lose other rights, free speech, right to worship, right to say run for public office?
Do you really believe that our Constitutional rights should be at the whim of Government bureaucrats?
bill
you lose your right to vote if you go to prison. so why not the right to bear arms? if you're mentally unstable, you shouldn't have that right.
Sigh, "like" doesn't mean the same as, it means similar to.
I already know there are gun laws. My point was that we should review current gun laws, study in different locales/states the effect these laws have on those areas, and on a federal level implement additional tightening of restrictions, especially in regards to not allowing terroristic sympathizers to buy weapons "like" AK-47s, such as AR-15 and other assault rifles.
ETA: The NRA and people like you are preventing the common sense thinking on gun laws mentioned above. Any mention of restrictions draws from your ilk an illogical response. All sorts of products are reviewed and safety measures are put in place all the time to keep up with society and in response to situations that kill people on a mass scale. Guns should be no different.
is that a fact? read my other posts on this thread?
Gun owners are screened for 3 days, refugees are screened for almost 2 years.
what's the vetting process? is it just checking ID? if we have a vetting process in place that worth a dime, how does an accused war criminal end up working security in Dulles airport?
If someone raises enough red flags to warrant 2 investigations by the FBI that person should forever be on their radar. We cannot violate that persons rights unless they are found to be guilty of something but buying a high powered rifle should have sent a message that something was up.
But lots of people buy "high powered rifles" (though I'd argue that the AR-15 doesn't fit that category), and they're not going to be used in this manner.
We're guaranteed freedom of religion and speech. We have the right to keep and bear arms. It would be a mistake to get rid of these rights, so where is the line? I suggested travel to the Middle East, in addition to the FBI investigations, but maybe that wouldn't be right, either.
One thing that seems to be clear is that these kind of attacks aren't going to magically stop.
what's the vetting process? is it just checking ID? if we have a vetting process in place that worth a dime, how does an accused war criminal end up working security in Dulles airport?
These murders of gays by an Islamic terrorist weren't the gun's fault. We know restrictive gun laws don't work. That data is available for anyone who cares to research it. These murders were caused by an ideologically flawed Muslim fanatic who hated Americans, gays, our way of life.
This tragedy has shown me that progressives, in ranking priority of their identity groups, rank Muslims above gays. The liberal press and the liberal politicians, including President Obama and Hillary Clinton, have said "We just don't know what the shooter's motivation could possibly be!" Nonsense.
Protecting Muslims is more important than defending the lives of gays to our Progressive politicians and the liberal press. I find that terribly sad, not to mention dangerous for these gay Americans.
I think you've hit on a big point! This should set the LBGT communities hair on fire that they're ranked BELOW Muslims in minority preference and protections.
Our leaders (such as they are) should've made a point to call out radical muslims who's sole mission is to kill those who are different from them, especially people in the LBGT community.
How in hell can anyone in the LBGT community still support those that openly pander/bow/scrape to those that would see them dead by any means possible?
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.