Biden threatens law abiding gun owners

[West]

Says they'd news F15s when he wants to take them out. Sick puppy

[reason10]

1 hour ago, West said:

Says they'd news F15s when he wants to take them out. Sick puppy

If you're referring to that !diotic speech he gave to his Hitler Youth supporters today, he sounded particularly incompetent and senile. It was laughable. I give him another four months before the dementia just takes him out completely.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

Says they'd news F15s when he wants to take them out. Sick puppy

You're not making ANY SENSE. Have you been drinking? LMAO

[West]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

If you're referring to that !diotic speech he gave to his Hitler Youth supporters today, he sounded particularly incompetent and senile. It was laughable. I give him another four months before the dementia just takes him out completely.

Yes it was a very disturbing speech from a man who's clearly not well

[reason10]

11 hours ago, West said:

Yes it was a very disturbing speech from a man who's clearly not well

 

11 hours ago, West said:

Yes it was a very disturbing speech from a man who's clearly not well

What was disturbing was that dumbass crowd who held on his every word and kept yelling out "four more years" to that  potato head. They are stupid off the charts.

 

 

[Aristides]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sandy-hook-students-graduation-1.7233611

[User]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sandy-hook-students-graduation-1.7233611

Was there anything in particular you wanted to share here, or were you just mindlessly posting random links?

 

[User]

Same old stupid arguments from dumb politicians on the left. They act like an armed population can't even fight back against F-15's.

It is just pure ignorance. 

For starters, armed populations can in fact fight back, because you can't win a war just by dropping bombs and those F-15's (and the American logistical Military machine) is based all over the country. Who is going to defend those air fields? Protect the fuel supply? Protect the parts delivery? Protect the food, water, and medical supplies all needed by all of the military bases spread out across the country?

Yes, an armed population can in fact defeat those F-15's.

[robosmith]

On 6/11/2024 at 7:08 PM, reason10 said:

If you're referring to that !diotic speech he gave to his Hitler Youth supporters today, he sounded particularly incompetent and senile. It was laughable. I give him another four months before the dementia just takes him out completely.

^This sounds particularly incompetent and senile. LMAO

[Aristides]

6 hours ago, User said:

Was there anything in particular you wanted to share here, or were you just mindlessly posting random links?

 

I think it speaks for itself. Nothing has changed in the last 12 years and you have no desire to see any.

[User]

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

I think it speaks for itself. Nothing has changed in the last 12 years and you have no desire to see any.

Clearly, It did not speak for itself. 

I have about a dozen proposals I would like to see to improve things. You claiming I have no desire is just you making crap up. 

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, User said:

Clearly, It did not speak for itself. 

I have about a dozen proposals I would like to see to improve things. You claiming I have no desire is just you making crap up. 

So why has nothing changed?

[User]

7 hours ago, Aristides said:

So why has nothing changed?

Where do you get that nothing has changed?

There has not been significant change because folks like you only want to focus on hating guns. 

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, User said:

Where do you get that nothing has changed?

There has not been significant change because folks like you only want to focus on hating guns. 

Like I said, you don't want change, the body count is acceptable. Price of freedom or some other nonsense.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Like I said, you don't want change, the body count is acceptable. Price of freedom or some other nonsense.

Yeah, I know what you said, but that doesn't make it any more honest or accurate. 

Here is change I support:

1. Remove "gun-free" zones and allow people with concealed carry permits to carry concealed in schools

2. Allow teachers who wish to be armed, to do so. It can include some minimum standards and safety practices

3. States that are "may issue" states that basically don't allow for concealed carry at all should change to "shall issue" so that people can reasonably obtain concealed carry permits

4. States with high restrictions on where you can carry concealed to the point of absurdity or impracticality should loosen those restrictions effectively ending gun free zones that only stop law abiding people from carrying firearms

5. Mandatory background checks on all firearm sales, BUT open up NICS use to individuals so they can do this on their own and not have to go through an FFL which is a bureaucracy that costs time and $$$ and is not always available in rural areas or smaller towns

6. Red Flag laws, BUT with clear and compelling language that guarantees a path to challenge them and obtain firearms taken

7. Enact universal concealed carry reciprocity across state lines 

8. Hold LEO accountable for their failures on background checks and failing to follow up on known criminals or people with issues that could make them deadly threats

9. Increase security in schools with more SRO's and better plans for physical security and its implementation 

10. Less "restorative justice" in schools and more punishment and removal of known problem children or those with gang affiliations

11. Stop electing left-wing soft on crime DA's who are more interested in "equity" than justice that they do not go after violent criminals or support no-bail policies that let violent criminals or known gang members back on the streets... 

12. Increase penalties for firearm laws that are broken and actually start enforcing the laws currently on the books better

13. More teeth behind Emergency Protection Orders, if people are a proven threat to another, need more than a piece of paper warning them to stay away

[Aristides]

3 minutes ago, User said:

Yeah, I know what you said, but that doesn't make it any more honest or accurate. 

Here is change I support:

1. Remove "gun-free" zones and allow people with concealed carry permits to carry concealed in schools

2. Allow teachers who wish to be armed, to do so. It can include some minimum standards and safety practices

3. States that are "may issue" states that basically don't allow for concealed carry at all should change to "shall issue" so that people can reasonably obtain concealed carry permits

4. States with high restrictions on where you can carry concealed to the point of absurdity or impracticality should loosen those restrictions effectively ending gun free zones that only stop law abiding people from carrying firearms

5. Mandatory background checks on all firearm sales, BUT open up NICS use to individuals so they can do this on their own and not have to go through an FFL which is a bureaucracy that costs time and $$$ and is not always available in rural areas or smaller towns

6. Red Flag laws, BUT with clear and compelling language that guarantees a path to challenge them and obtain firearms taken

7. Enact universal concealed carry reciprocity across state lines 

8. Hold LEO accountable for their failures on background checks and failing to follow up on known criminals or people with issues that could make them deadly threats

9. Increase security in schools with more SRO's and better plans for physical security and its implementation 

10. Less "restorative justice" in schools and more punishment and removal of known problem children or those with gang affiliations

11. Stop electing left-wing soft on crime DA's who are more interested in "equity" than justice that they do not go after violent criminals or support no-bail policies that let violent criminals or known gang members back on the streets... 

12. Increase penalties for firearm laws that are broken and actually start enforcing the laws currently on the books better

13. More teeth behind Emergency Protection Orders, if people are a proven threat to another, need more than a piece of paper warning them to stay away

As always, your solution is more guns in more places and deal with the consequences later.

[User]

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

As always, your solution is more guns in more places and deal with the consequences later.

You did not even read my comments or are too dishonest to discuss them with me. 

That is not all I said at all. 

You have to lie and say I don't want change and then when I show you the change I want you have to lie in response to that. 

 

 

[Aristides]

15 minutes ago, User said:

You did not even read my comments or are too dishonest to discuss them with me. 

That is not all I said at all. 

You have to lie and say I don't want change and then when I show you the change I want you have to lie in response to that. 

 

 

I read them and that is exactly what you want. You want more people carrying guns in more places and to turn your schools into fortresses where kids have to undergo active shooter drills like they were fire drills, teachers are armed and shooting it out with crazies armed with semi automatic weapons is part of their job description. 

Also, your background checks are a joke, they are just a check of a data base where much of the data depends on states providing it and if a check isn't done in three days the gun can be automatically sold. Checks only apply to dealers and there is no check of private sales. Your checks are window dressing and a bad joke.

There was no requirement for a real check on Hunter, he had no previous convictions so wouldn't appear in a data base. A real background check would have discovered his drug addiction. A real background check is when someone's background is actually checked.

Edited June 14 by Aristides

[User]

Just now, Aristides said:

I read them and that is exactly what you want. You want more people carrying guns in more places and to turn your schools into fortresses where kids have to undergo active shooter drills like they were fire drills.

It is a part of what I want, but not all I want. That was your lie. Be a man... or whatever you are and own up to that. 

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Also, your background checks are a joke, they are just a check of a data base where much of the data depends on states providing it and if a check isn't done in three days the gun can be automatically sold. Checks only apply to dealers and there is no check of private sales. Your checks are window dressing and a bad joke.

No, background checks are no joke and if you really read my comments I clearly said:

"Hold LEO accountable for their failures on background checks "

That includes their failures to submit data to the system. We can improve the system so checks do not go to a 3 day mark, but those are rare and I literally just said to make them universal on all sales including private sales. 

Seriously, you did not even read what I wrote:

"Mandatory background checks on all firearm sales"

Talking to liberals like you on here is a complete waste of time. You are not being honest here, you don't read what I write... you just make crap up. 

 

 

[Aristides]

How can you hold LEO's accountable for something they are not required  to do? If they actually did real background checks, gun types would be screaming about their privacy and rights being violated. Your background checks are merely a data base check that is requested by gun dealers. LEO's have nothing to do with them.

So why aren't there real mandatory background checks on all firearm sales? Why aren't  Republicans and gun activist organization  like the NRA calling for them?

Edited June 14 by Aristides

[West]

12 minutes ago, Aristides said:

How can you hold LEO's accountable for something they are not required  to do? If they actually did real background checks, gun types would be screaming about their privacy and rights being violated. Your background checks are merely a data base check that is requested by gun dealers. LEO's have nothing to do with them.

So why aren't there real mandatory background checks on all firearm sales? Why aren't  Republicans and gun activist organization  like the NRA calling for them?

What you are proposing would be unattainable

[Aristides]

22 minutes ago, West said:

What you are proposing would be unattainable

In the US it seems. Certainly attained in most other countries, including Canada.

[West]

26 minutes ago, Aristides said:

In the US it seems. Certainly attained in most other countries, including Canada.

Our long form gun registry was a major dud and didn't really do anything. Sure it had some slight utility for RCMP officers but really nothing they couldn't gain without the registry in place. 

It was later scrapped

SC just shot down the ban on bump stocks. I personally disagree as bump stocks are more for range shooting and not really useful in hunting but to each their own

[User]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

How can you hold LEO's accountable for something they are not required  to do? If they actually did real background checks, gun types would be screaming about their privacy and rights being violated. Your background checks are merely a data base check that is requested by gun dealers. LEO's have nothing to do with them.

So why aren't there real mandatory background checks on all firearm sales? Why aren't  Republicans and gun activist organization  like the NRA calling for them?

I see you have moved on from your lies without being man enough to acknowledge what you were doing. Instead, you don't even bother to quote me in your response here. 

I have no idea what you mean by a "real" background check, it seems you just want to make up some kind of impossible, burdensome bureaucracy that results in people having to wait years to get a gun. 

 

[Aristides]

2 hours ago, West said:

Our long form gun registry was a major dud and didn't really do anything. Sure it had some slight utility for RCMP officers but really nothing they couldn't gain without the registry in place. 

It was later scrapped

SC just shot down the ban on bump stocks. I personally disagree as bump stocks are more for range shooting and not really useful in hunting but to each their own

I'm not referring to the long gun registry. Canadians have to take a government approved firearms safety course, an exam and undergo extensive background checks that can take some time in order to get a possession and acquisition license, before they can buy or  have possession of a firearm. 

https://getdefended.ca/2023/10/11/step-by-step-how-to-apply-for-a-pal-in-canada-and-navigate-the-application-process/

Bump stocks aren't good for anything other than making a semi auto act like a fully auto. Other than spraying bullets around I don't see what use they would be at a range. 

2 hours ago, User said:

I see you have moved on from your lies without being man enough to acknowledge what you were doing. Instead, you don't even bother to quote me in your response here. 

I have no idea what you mean by a "real" background check, it seems you just want to make up some kind of impossible, burdensome bureaucracy that results in people having to wait years to get a gun. 

 

Exactly, you really don't want anything to change.  

Edited June 14 by Aristides