• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks...[W: 349]

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

The USA is not a foreign country.

Parts of this country are looking more and more like Europe, at least philosophically, every day.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Parts of this country are looking more and more like Europe, at least philosophically, every day.

Which has nothing to do with any bill on background checks taking away your rights.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Which has nothing to do with any bill on background checks taking away your rights.

Not directly. However, the acceptance of European ideals deeply concerns many of us. Especially when it comes to things like gun ownership and other Conservative values.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Not directly. However, the acceptance of European ideals deeply concerns many of us. Especially when it comes to things like gun ownership and other Conservative values.

America was in part founded and inspired by some of those European ideals. Many European writers were significant in developing the beliefs for many of our founders.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

They want to get re-elected. It's as simple as that unless they actually do hold some respect for the Constitution...

I don't know about that, but they respect elections.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Which has nothing to do with any bill on background checks taking away your rights.

People who are vigilant in protecting the Constitution don't like slippery slopes.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

People who are vigilant in protecting the Constitution don't like slippery slopes.

One then has to wonder why so many on the right seem to be permanently living at the intersection of Slippery Slope Street and Paranoia Place.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

One then has to wonder why so many on the right seem to be permanently living at the intersection of Slippery Slope Street and Paranoia Place.

Just try to put more regs on abortion, and find out who lives on that corner too.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Just try to put more regs on abortion, and find out who lives on that corner too.

THE DEERHUNTER.
Robert DeNiro.

"This is this, this isn't something else, this is this."
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

93% of Americans are in favor of
background checks. Sad that 46 Senators lack a backbone to stand up to the NRA and the wacko gun lobby.

Wrong,

Look, it WASN'T suppose to pass the house and Obama knew that.

This whole thing, the demagogy, the crying Newtown parents, the fear mongering and posting statistics that are flat out lies, was for the sole purpose of creating a wedge issue in the 2014 midterms.

And this was being done as our economic issues were being ignored.

Classy Democrats
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Sorry Zyph...but you are wrong. I don't support banning handguns.

Well, wonderful job moving the goal post there.

I do, however, believe that there are some weapons such as military assault weapons that justifiably should be banned.

Thanks for admitting you flat out were lying and being amazingly dishonest.

I don't support gun bans.

Congratulations...you show yourself to be a complete and utter hyper partisan whose words should never be considered to be anything more than bull**** as you will willingly and happily lie about what you feel to push your agenda.

Disgusting, simpilar to the disgusting fake attempt to cry about "liberty and justice for all" in your signature. You don't give a damn about civil rights, you just a typical hollow politically driven shill who will say anything to push their agenda and to hell with principles.

And YES....I do believe that there are people out there who should not be able to own weapons...but because I believe that convicted felons and mentally ill individuals should not be able to possess guns does not mean that I believe in a flat-out weapon ban.

And more dishonesty by your civil rights hating self, as you declare people who wish to own certain guns to be "mentally ill". Thus the very notion of wanting to exercise ones civil right makes them target to be restrained from doing it by the government.

It's a sick and twisted form of logic. Congratulations, your disgust and disdain for civil liberties is on par with those afraid of "the gays" getting married. You're no better than them, you tailor your arguments and your views to suit your bigoted view point just like they do to justify your assault on civil liberties.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

No, YOU were the one that brought up the opinion that conservatives are paranoid or scared of the slippery slope. I just pointed out your inconsistency. Of course I should know better than to argue with one who is inconsistent. Welcome to the ignore list.

THE DEERHUNTER.
Robert DeNiro.

"This is this, this isn't something else, this is this."
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Well, wonderful job moving the goal post there.



Thanks for admitting you flat out were lying and being amazingly dishonest.



Congratulations...you show yourself to be a complete and utter hyper partisan whose words should never be considered to be anything more than bull**** as you will willingly and happily lie about what you feel to push your agenda.

Disgusting, simpilar to the disgusting fake attempt to cry about "liberty and justice for all" in your signature. You don't give a damn about civil rights, you just a typical hollow politically driven shill who will say anything to push their agenda and to hell with principles.



And more dishonesty by your civil rights hating self, as you declare people who wish to own certain guns to be "mentally ill". Thus the very notion of wanting to exercise ones civil right makes them target to be restrained from doing it by the government.

It's a sick and twisted form of logic. Congratulations, your disgust and disdain for civil liberties is on par with those afraid of "the gays" getting married. You're no better than them, you tailor your arguments and your views to suit your bigoted view point just like they do to justify your assault on civil liberties.


You can claim whatever you want to Zyph...but the bottom line is that in order to "support" your argument, you resort to misconstruing things that I have said in order to fit your diatribe here. It is very clear from my posts that when I am talking about "gun bans" I'm talking about flat-out bans on guns. So your attempt to claim that I "lied" and attempts to claim inconsistencies is a big FAIL. I have said all along...and I will say here again, just in case you honestly misunderstood my position rather than manipulatively misconstrued it.....I DO believe that there are some classes of weapons that SHOULD be banned. The Constitution already allows the banning of some weapons and it is arguable whether additional bans would be Constitutional. What I don't support is the banning of handguns and most rifles. See, Zyph....the problem with your argument and the problem with a lot of the gun nuts is that arguments such as yours are used by them to fuel their paranoia that people are coming after their guns. Its not true...and it is nothing more than hysteria. Most people in this country do not support an all out gun ban which means that it is never going to get legislated. The idea that you have to fight every reasonable effort at curtailing gun violence in this country because it possibly could lead to a slippery slope that would lead the government to come knocking on people's doors to steal their guns is absurd. However, it is a talking point that gets perpetuated by the NRA and other special interest groups.
The bottom line is that your diatribe here on me is wrong because it is based on a faulty premise and it takes leaps that are illogical. You are better than this Zyph. We don't always agree, however, I generally don't see you resorting to misconstruing facts the way that you did so here.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

You claimed you did not support gun bans. Not "complete gun ban". Not "ban on all guns". But "gun bans", full stop. You then claim you support some gun bans.

You lied. You decieved. You were dishonest. Which fits with your bogus signature line and hollow hypocritical stance on civil rights.

Everything else is you backpeddling trying to cover your tail.

It is people like you that are the individuals behind this legislation and like you they can not be trusted, which is exactly why I'm happy to see it fail before it goes any farther.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

No, YOU were the one that brought up the opinion that conservatives are paranoid or scared of the slippery slope. I just pointed out your inconsistency. Of course I should know better than to argue with one who is inconsistent. Welcome to the ignore list.

You did NOT point out any inconsistency. You simply attempted to employ the age old tactic that defended your own idiots by saying some of your enemies are also idiots. Such an assertion - while making you feel good about yourself and your allies - does nothing in any way shape or from to negate the truth of paranoia on the far right on this issue.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

You did NOT point out any inconsistency. You simply attempted to employ the age old tactic that defended your own idiots by saying some of your enemies are also idiots. Such an assertion - while making you feel good about yourself and your allies - does nothing in any way shape or from to negate the truth of paranoia on the far right on this issue.

I don't think it is paranoia at all when we have on record legislators proving across the spectrum that intentions behind legislation is designed to reach ends that are not what is provided in the actual legislation.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I don't think it is paranoia at all when we have on record legislators proving across the spectrum that intentions behind legislation is designed to reach ends that are not what is provided in the actual legislation.

I think all of us - of all stripes and persuasions - can find a few people who voice opinions that perhaps cause us serious concern. However, the kind of people you are talking about are the exceptions rather than the rule and have demonstrated no power at all to deliver on their wishes. Taking that into consideration, it is not at all rational to allow ones mind to be controlled or manipulated by a small number of people voicing extreme views which are going nowhere.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I think all of us - of all stripes and persuasions - can find a few people who voice opinions that perhaps cause us serious concern. However, the kind of people you are talking about are the exceptions rather than the rule and have demonstrated no power at all to deliver on their wishes. Taking that into consideration, it is not at all rational to allow ones mind to be controlled or manipulated by a small number of people voicing extreme views which are going nowhere.

Although intellectually that may very well be true, I for one, am not one to just wait to see if it happens, because frankly when it does happen, it is too late.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Although intellectually that may very well be true, I for one, am not one to just wait to see if it happens, because frankly when it does happen, it is too late.

I am not ready to have it happen either.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

One then has to wonder why so many on the right seem to be permanently living at the intersection of Slippery Slope Street and Paranoia Place.
Not just those on the right, but also we moderate democrats object to the constant left wing barrage against private ownership of firearms. There is more than one reason to believe the average gun control nut wants to eliminate our second amendment rights totally.Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

You claimed you did not support gun bans. Not "complete gun ban". Not "ban on all guns". But "gun bans", full stop. You then claim you support some gun bans.

You lied. You decieved. You were dishonest. Which fits with your bogus signature line and hollow hypocritical stance on civil rights.

Everything else is you backpeddling trying to cover your tail.

It is people like you that are the individuals behind this legislation and like you they can not be trusted, which is exactly why I'm happy to see it fail before it goes any farther.
Disney and Haymarket both exemplify what I mean when I speak of left wing attempts to incrementally eliminate all our rights. There, "just a little gun control" is nothing more than "a little now, a little later and eventually we get the entire piece of gun control pie." I object to any gun control if for no other reason not to be incrementalized to death.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

POLL

Is there anyone on this forum who does not believe it is the absolute intent of most Gun Control nuts to eliminate the private ownership of firearms?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

POLL

Is there anyone on this forum who does not believe it is the absolute intent of most Gun Control nuts to eliminate the private ownership of firearms?

Barrack Obama is against concealed guns, as well as openly carrying guns so it seems with him, and like-minded politicians, that this war against the 2nd Amendment will continue. It's probably one of the easier issues to politicize, especially if children and distraught parents are brought into the debate.

If he was to bring in some of the victims from Chicago, the community he organized, then perhaps a broader picture of the reality would appear. A white parent whose child was murdered is definitely in the minority.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Moderator's Warning:
Since we can't play nice: terms like "gun nuts" and "gun control nuts" and "hoplophobia" and any other baiting type comments need to no longer be used in this thread. Keep it civil, stop with the name calling and baiting and talking about each other.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Before all you Libtards bust a gut over this - READ THE BILL!!!!!

S. 649: Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013


Full Title - A bill to ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale, and for other purposes.

Full text @ Text of S. 649: Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013 (Placed on Calendar in the Senate version) - GovTrack.us

I didn't read all of it but I get the idea why Senators rejected it is included in the provision for penalizing states for not fully implementing data bases and meshing them with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System

I'm certain there are other goodies in there to further reduce individual rights.

And Dingy Harry only voted against it so he can bring it up again!
 
Back
Top Bottom