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.
The vote happened in the Senate. The people demanding a vote are from the House of Representatives. Those two things are not the same.
It's depressing that there are so many adults who don't know even the basics of how our government is set up.
I know where the vote happened, I know plenty about the working of Congress considering I did an internship there and I am a political science major. Not that means much, but you jumped to conclusions which were inaccurate about me.
They did not like that the vote did not go their way in the Senate, I guarantee there would be no sit-in if the vote went their way as the House would have had the vote on the Senate passed bill. But since the bill did not even pass the Senate, why in the world would the House even need to vote for it, and Ryan stated that about as clearly as possible.
They are just doing some BS grandstanding that amounts to no actual productivity, surprise surprise from such an institution.
Oh, really? Do you ever go on commercial flights? Are you mad about the idea of the existence of the no-fly list? Why is it that no one's complaining about rules and restrictions on planes? The proposals have an appeal process in place for those on the list, BTW. And what's your problem with universal background checks?
Last week, conservatives tried to say that the FBI didn't do their job, but this week they're saying that even if the FBI was relentlessly on the murderer's trail, nothing should prevent him from being able to purchase firearms. Do you see a disconnect there?
I also find it ironic that the same people against restricting gun sales to suspected terrorists are simultaneously fine with throwing rules and rights out the door and propose anything from internment camps to torturing suspects or potentially violating rights of people of a certain religion or ethnicity.
I'm fine with guns but we have far too many people that think they're own warped interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is the only or paramount right to our existence. We can and do have some rules in place to ownership and use, for good reason.
Yes, I am against no fly lists as well. If someone is deemed too dangerous to fly, even with the multi-billion dollar security for screening people in place, then why in the hell are they allowed in public? Ok, so the person is too dangerous to be on a plane, yet the person can go to any other public area without restriction.
A person is not notified when they are on a no-fly list, and the appeals process can be lengthy and even at that, they can still deny the appeal and there is no legal standard due process in place.
On average, Democrats (that’s my team*) use guns for shooting the innocent. We call that crime.
On average, Republicans use guns for sporting purposes and self-defense.
...
So it seems to me that gun control can’t be solved because Democrats are using guns to kill each other – and want it to stop – whereas Republicans are using guns to defend against Democrats. Psychologically, those are different risk profiles. And you can’t reconcile those interests, except on the margins. For example, both sides might agree that rocket launchers are a step too far. But Democrats are unlikely to talk Republicans out of gun ownership because it comes off as “Put down your gun so I can shoot you.”
Oh, really? Do you ever go on commercial flights? Are you mad about the idea of the existence of the no-fly list? Why is it that no one's complaining about rules and restrictions on planes? The proposals have an appeal process in place for those on the list, BTW. And what's your problem with universal background checks?
Last week, conservatives tried to say that the FBI didn't do their job, but this week they're saying that even if the FBI was relentlessly on the murderer's trail, nothing should prevent him from being able to purchase firearms. Do you see a disconnect there?
I also find it ironic that the same people against restricting gun sales to suspected terrorists are simultaneously fine with throwing rules and rights out the door and propose anything from internment camps to torturing suspects or potentially violating rights of people of a certain religion or ethnicity.
I'm fine with guns but we have far too many people that think they're own warped interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is the only or paramount right to our existence. We can and do have some rules in place to ownership and use, for good reason.
You are no better. Violating a citizens rights are violating a citizens rights. Period. No secretive lists. No banning anything based upon a hunch. No none of the stuff you list.
You gave yourself away in your earlier post. You aren't for simply banning some guns, You yourself note that wouldn't have stopped this guy. You are for "steps" to remove our rights. NO.
Pathetic. All these Dems want to do to is continually crap on the Constitution. Beyond tired of it. I think this will backfire and actually help mobilize gun owners against the anti-freedom statist Dems.
The entire Patriot Act was crapping on the Constitution.
what's more newsworthy is what the dems didn't protest!
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.
