U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-02-2018, 08:42 PM
 
5,510 posts, read 6,943,287 times
Reputation: 2767

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"the Supreme Court upheld the bans in CT and NY."

Do you support every single ruling the Supreme Court has given since its inception?

MANY past rulings have been overturned by later courts.
Like the death penalty ban in 1969, overturned in 1976. The Supreme Court did say the federal government can kill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-03-2018, 05:06 AM
 
36,471 posts, read 15,965,403 times
Reputation: 8281
Quote:
Originally Posted by RosieSD View Post
Actually, I agree with you, it is not far fetched when President Trump says stuff like "take the guns first, go through due process second."

Trump on Gun Restraining Orders: 'I Like Taking the Guns Early' - 'Take the Guns First, Go Through Due Process Second' | Breitbart

Folks, stop looking at our Country through a Republican vs. Democrat or a conservative vs. liberal lens. Gun control is the least of our problems.

A President who does not understand the Constitution and our laws, and who thinks neither apply to him, is of graver concern.

United we stand, divided we fall.
I note how many in the media are taking his comment out of context (something they NEVER DO, ha-ha)

President Trump discussed gun violence restraining orders that would give law enforcement the ability to remove weapons from people who are reported to be dangers to themselves or others by obtaining a court order, but stated, “I like taking the guns early.” He further expressed openness to “take the guns first, go through due process second.” After Vice President Mike Pence referenced gun violence restraining orders, Trump stated, “Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court"

In other words like this nut Cruz who was reported over and over, talked about shooting people,was visited by the police dozens of times., take HIS guns away FIRST.

His actions, IMO, constitute "probable cause" to take his guns.

If nothing wrong is found give them back to him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 05:11 AM
 
36,471 posts, read 15,965,403 times
Reputation: 8281
Quote:
Originally Posted by ram2 View Post
Like the death penalty ban in 1969, overturned in 1976. The Supreme Court did say the federal government can kill.
Like when the Supreme Court stopped the counting of ballots (for the 3rd of 4th time ) after the Bush Gore election and MANY on the left screamed bloody murder.

When someone LIKES a ruling, they are happy and proclaim the court is the greatest in the world..

When they DON'T like a ruling, the court is biased and the scum of the earth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 05:57 AM
 
Location: Florida
21,621 posts, read 11,075,550 times
Reputation: 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by NC211 View Post
Man it must really suck to live a life of such fear and paranoia of your own elected officials that insisting on owning a weapon that the majority of your own countrymen don’t want on the streets is what you think is right, even though that means that so many wrongs seem to be occurring over and over again with said weapon by those who are protected by the same lobbiest group as the one who bastardizeds the 2nd amendment as their calling card in our modern society.
Go walk down some of these crime ridden streets at night where gun shots are heard daily. Black people keep home at night for fear of the gangs who shoot randomly for kicks. Get out of your bubble and see all of the real world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 06:46 AM
 
Location: D.C.
2,206 posts, read 1,830,914 times
Reputation: 3476
Who are you, the Equilizer? I don’t see you doing anything to stop those gangs with your own personal stash of advanced weaponry, so why do you need them?

I am very well travelled by the way, from the Deep South to the neighborhood of Chicago, nyc, kc, okc, Miami, and many parts inbetween. Cities, and back country of eastern North Carolina. Have family members in law enforcement from local county sheriff to FBI to retired USAF Colonel who spent many a Christmas behind the stick of a B52 with a belly full of live nukes circling the northern Atlantic waiting for the order to erase Moscow from human existence.. No bubble here amigo.

Last edited by NC211; 03-03-2018 at 06:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 07:07 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,666 posts, read 13,808,336 times
Reputation: 6927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
I note how many in the media are taking his comment out of context (something they NEVER DO, ha-ha)

President Trump discussed gun violence restraining orders that would give law enforcement the ability to remove weapons from people who are reported to be dangers to themselves or others by obtaining a court order, but stated, “I like taking the guns early.” He further expressed openness to “take the guns first, go through due process second.” After Vice President Mike Pence referenced gun violence restraining orders, Trump stated, “Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court"

In other words like this nut Cruz who was reported over and over, talked about shooting people,was visited by the police dozens of times., take HIS guns away FIRST.

His actions, IMO, constitute "probable cause" to take his guns.

If nothing wrong is found give them back to him.
I don't believe his comments were related to just restraining orders, maybe you have the exact quote. Seems to me that he was sanctioning removing guns just based on complaints. I don't see that Cruz was specifically charged with anything, what would be the grounds for removing his guns. A large number of visits to his house doesn't constitute grounds for removing his guns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2018, 07:17 AM
 
Location: *
8,041 posts, read 2,385,998 times
Reputation: 2203
Quote:
Originally Posted by NC211 View Post
Man it must really suck to live a life of such fear and paranoia of your own elected officials that insisting on owning a weapon that the majority of your own countrymen don’t want on the streets is what you think is right, even though that means that so many wrongs seem to be occurring over and over again with said weapon by those who are protected by the same lobbiest group as the one who bastardizeds the 2nd amendment as their calling card in our modern society.
Fear sells.

http://www.notable-quotes.com/f/fear_quotes_ii.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2018, 06:22 AM
 
36,471 posts, read 15,965,403 times
Reputation: 8281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
I don't believe his comments were related to just restraining orders, maybe you have the exact quote. Seems to me that he was sanctioning removing guns just based on complaints. I don't see that Cruz was specifically charged with anything, what would be the grounds for removing his guns. A large number of visits to his house doesn't constitute grounds for removing his guns.
"I don't believe his comments were related to just restraining orders, maybe you have the exact quote."

Look up the video.

"what would be the grounds for removing his guns."

"The day after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, President Donald Trump that people “[m]ust always report” signs that may suggest a person is planning a mass killing. But more than a week later, it’s become clear that many people did report such signs about the shooter, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, to police — and law enforcement simply didn’t act.
In fact, law enforcement didn’t act at several points:
  1. The FBI received a tip in January from a person close to Cruz that the 19-year-old owned guns and could be a future school shooter. According to the FBI statement, the tipster described Cruz’s “desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.” But then, “Protocols were not followed.The Miami field office never got the tip, and “no further investigation was conducted at this time.”
  2. Before the FBI, the Broward County Sheriff’s Office in Florida received a tip in November that, according to the Miami Herald, Cruz “could be a school shooter in the making,” but the warning was never written up.
  3. The Herald went on: The November tip “came just weeks after a relative called urging [the sheriff’s office] to seize his weapons. Two years ago, according to a newly released timeline of interactions with Cruz’s family, a deputy investigated a report that Cruz ‘planned to shoot up the school’ — intelligence that was forwarded to the school’s resource officer, with no apparent result.” In total, the sheriff’s office “fielded 23 calls in the past decade related to Cruz or his family.”
  4. Even during the shooting itself, law enforcement was slow to act. According to Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, the armed school resource officer at the scene of the shooting “never went in” as he “clearly” heard gunfire for four to six minutes, instead standing outside of the school building — a failure that potentially led to more deaths. The deputy, Scot Peterson, has since quit.
  5. According to CNN and Florida’s Sun Sentinel, other sheriff’s deputies on the scene held back from entering. The sheriff’s office is investigating the claims.
At practically every level, law enforcement seemed to fail — allowing Cruz to carry out a massacre that killed 17 people. The gaps in law enforcement’s response have driven calls for Israel to resign, with a state representative writing to Florida Gov. Rick Scott to ask him to remove Israel from office.
But there are genuine questions about whether the police could have prevented the shooting even if they had taken the prior tips more seriously."


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...f-fbi-failures
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2018, 07:32 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
14,133 posts, read 11,571,543 times
Reputation: 13193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
Those who want to disarm Americans just do not understand the we Americans have a right to defend ourselves. If we were invaded by a foreign entity as in the history of many countries,we would be an easy target to round up and kill.

Don't say it is far fetched. We have well documented events that this has happened time and time again. Our forefathers wanted to protect us and not leave us Americans defenseless against foreign or domestic threats.

Those attacking the NRA are actually taking our rights away. Many people do not understand this fact.

What many if not most folks are failing to recognize is that there is an invading foreign power boots on the ground here in the US right now. This force is terrorizing both urban and rural areas as we speak. They are heavily armed and extremely well funded and have exactly zero qualms about blasting anything or anyone in their way to doll rags.


We call them street gangs, and they are fully backed by ultra rich cartels which supply them with drugs, money and any guns they want. As we play around on CD, somewhere in any number of US cities a family is trying to get breakfast to their kids as they lay nose to nose with the family dog to stay under the path of stray (or aimed) bullets.


Closer to home for me, somewhere in the badlands of the Great Basin someone will die today while out looking for strays and stumbling on a meth lab up a dry wadi. The days where we could ride out alone on a gather are LONG gone. Nobody even thinks about riding out alone anymore.


The AR 15 has become the new saddle rifle these days. Folks in the cities are denied any such option. Shooting back is a crime and anyone who does so will be the one prosecuted. Not the gang banging fleabags who were shooting up their street.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2018, 07:44 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,145 posts, read 33,571,533 times
Reputation: 14138
Quote:
Originally Posted by NC211 View Post
Haha!!! This made me laugh.

Again, written when the United States amounted to what is less than Cincinnati Ohio today, and a sinus infection would kill you.

Last I checked, the DeLorean was still broken.

Privately made and owned..... The Puckle Machine Gun.
First made in 1718.
73 years before the drafting of the 2nd amendment.

Arms! Not.... small arms, the government deems acceptable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:22 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top