• 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

Zyphlin said:
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.
Click to expand...

Again Zyph....you are blatantly misconstruing. Don't pull one sentence out and base your argument on it. If you follow the thread, it is very clear that when I say "I don't support gun bans" that I am saying that I don't support bans on all guns. Your attempts to misconstrue and then base your bogus argument on it...doesn't change the facts.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

dnsmith said:
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.
Click to expand...
As I read posts here about people being afraid that their rights to guns will be denied by this legislation I keep trying to understand how anyone can believe that? Nothing in the Mancin - Toomey amendment suggests that and in truth it STRENGTHENS your rights. The slippery slope argument is a ruse IMHO. Nothing that has happened recently in terms of legislation has anything to do with gun confiscation yet that's the argument people employ.

The liars here are the NRA and the outrageous propaganda they push - they're the liars and they're the ones that are a front for the gun lobby = gun money because at the end of the day they're true agenda is to help sell more guns and ammo...that's the real plot here....
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

jakiejakester said:
As I read posts here about people being afraid that their rights to guns will be denied by this legislation I keep trying to understand how anyone can believe that? Nothing in the Mancin - Toomey amendment suggests that and in truth it STRENGTHENS your rights. The slippery slope argument is a ruse IMHO. Nothing that has happened recently in terms of legislation has anything to do with gun confiscation yet that's the argument people employ.

The liars here are the NRA and the outrageous propaganda they push - they're the liars and they're the ones that are a front for the gun lobby = gun money because at the end of the day they're true agenda is to help sell more guns and ammo...that's the real plot here....
Click to expand...

There are thousands of gun laws ON THE BOOKS that ARE NOT being used.

Take everything you said about gun owners and the NRA and put Leftists and Obama in their place. Then you'll be accurate.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

dnsmith said:
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
Click to expand...

"... average gun nut control....."

you win the prize my friend for whatever the hell that means in your universe. :doh:roll:
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

jakiejakester said:
As I read posts here about people being afraid that their rights to guns will be denied by this legislation I keep trying to understand how anyone can believe that? Nothing in the Mancin - Toomey amendment suggests that and in truth it STRENGTHENS your rights. The slippery slope argument is a ruse IMHO. Nothing that has happened recently in terms of legislation has anything to do with gun confiscation yet that's the argument people employ.
Click to expand...

This is where people keep getting it wrong. No one has said this in itself is a gun grab. They are saying it is another incremental step Leading up to gun registry's and yes confiscation or outright banning of certain weapons. The laws in Chicago and DC plus the Fienstien bill should be ample evidence as to what is the long term agenda. The shortsightedness of those who want to pass this kind of law is the real problem.

jakiejakester said:
The liars here are the NRA and the outrageous propaganda they push - they're the liars and they're the ones that are a front for the gun lobby = gun money because at the end of the day they're true agenda is to help sell more guns and ammo...that's the real plot here....
Click to expand...

What have they lied about? I have not seen anything that they said about this legislation or gun grabbing. If you have it, please post the source of this info?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

haymarket said:
"... average gun nut control....."

you win the prize my friend for whatever the hell that means in your universe. :doh:roll:
Click to expand...

I took it as, kinda like.....squirrels that control their nuts before eating them. :lol:
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

jakiejakester said:
As I read posts here about people being afraid that their rights to guns will be denied by this legislation I keep trying to understand how anyone can believe that? Nothing in the Mancin - Toomey amendment suggests that and in truth it STRENGTHENS your rights. The slippery slope argument is a ruse IMHO. Nothing that has happened recently in terms of legislation has anything to do with gun confiscation yet that's the argument people employ.

The liars here are the NRA and the outrageous propaganda they push - they're the liars and they're the ones that are a front for the gun lobby = gun money because at the end of the day they're true agenda is to help sell more guns and ammo...that's the real plot here....
Click to expand...


Confiscation doesn't mean that 'jack booted' agents of government have to come to your door and physically take the gun. It can just as easily be outlawing the ownership.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

politico's lead last nite: boxed in

There are two very different President Obamas.

There’s the confident, uncompromising Obama who sought to shame and bully Republicans into submitting to his agenda of tax increases and sweeping gun reform. This version of Obama was dominant until one month ago.

Then there’s the calmer, more compromising Obama — the one who has courted Republicans and taken on his own party with a call for (modest) reductions in entitlement spending. This version of Obama took command last month.

Both are flailing.
Click to expand...

Behind the Curtain: Obama, boxed in - POLITICO.com

and, according to "several of his friends, he knows it"

he goes guns, gets squat

grand bargain is bupkus

which makes immigration his last chance

and, "as one influential democratic adviser told us, that’s only because the president has largely stayed on the sidelines"

if indeed anything substantial ever does matriculate on this issue, marco rubio will get as much credit as barack lameduck hussein

but immigration reform is gonna fall---you are going to see 100 very ugly headlines from mainstream media about this bill, the details it comprises, in the next 100 days...

and right now, anything with the duck's fingerprints on it is doa

he's poison

and he knows it

tax the rich, anyone?

what else has he got?

"the combination of republican resistance and the high number of senate democrats running in red states in 2014 virtually assures little change for at least the next 18 months"

as in, "virtually assures"

axelrod is "shell shocked"

are you?

obama's learned that "the job of being president is a drag under divided government"

it's always all about him

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

Black Manta said:
No one has said this in itself is a gun grab.
Click to expand...
Really? You haven't read many of the posts in this thread then.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

The Prof said:
politico's lead last nite: boxed in



Behind the Curtain: Obama, boxed in - POLITICO.com

and, according to "several of his friends, he knows it"

he goes guns, gets squat

grand bargain is bupkus

which makes immigration his last chance

and, "as one influential democratic adviser told us, that’s only because the president has largely stayed on the sidelines"

if indeed anything substantial ever does matriculate on this issue, marco rubio will get as much credit as barack lameduck hussein

but immigration reform is gonna fall---you are going to see 100 very ugly headlines from mainstream media about this bill, the details it comprises, in the next 100 days...

and right now, anything with the duck's fingerprints on it is doa

he's poison

and he knows it

tax the rich, anyone?

what else has he got?

"the combination of republican resistance and the high number of senate democrats running in red states in 2014 virtually assures little change for at least the next 18 months"

as in, "virtually assures"

axelrod is "shell shocked"

can you blame him?

obama's learned that "the job of being president is a drag under divided government"

it's always all about him

sad
Click to expand...


disney, I don't agree with you often, but when you're right, you are right....This post of yours should be read, re read, then read again. It is spot on as to the position that Obama has placed himself in, and now he gets to reap what he has sown....

He is a lame duck, and it upsets him tremendously....Just pay attention to his anger at not getting Toomey/Manchin....
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

disneydude said:
Really? You haven't read many of the posts in this thread then.
Click to expand...

Yes I have and they said what I pointed out...

That it can lead up to it as I explained and you ignored. Just like the rest of my post you decided to ignore.

You might want to actually look at what I posted and respond to it in context.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

usnwr this afternoon says the same: "obama's political position seems surprisingly weak today"

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken-Walshs-Washington/2013/04/19/a-rocky-second-term-for-Obama

global warming? good luck

cuz if you can't get a swiss cheese background checks bill in the wake of that brutal assassination of kindergartners...

usnwr, however, raises a new worry

boston has put terrorism back on top, something barry hussein does NOT want to talk about

the prof (because he always liked and respected you, despite the fact that you talk ten times more than he does and read 100 times less) will clue you in on another---

dr kermit barron gosnell

why won't barry hussein, who really does have an aversion to firearms despite millions of us relying on one for self defense, come out against scissors?

also---see the media turn
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Black Manta said:
Yes I have and they said what I pointed out...

That it can lead up to it as I explained and you ignored. Just like the rest of my post you decided to ignore.

You might want to actually look at what I posted and respond to it in context.
Click to expand...

You didn't read very carefully then. I could find many in which they referred to this legislation as "gun grabbing".....not what you claim.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

disneydude said:
You didn't read very carefully then. I could find many in which they referred to this legislation as "gun grabbing".....not what you claim.
Click to expand...

And yet you still have shown nothing.

Go figure. This also addresses very little of what I said. That's OK though, I don't care.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

jakiejakester said:
As I read posts here about people being afraid that their rights to guns will be denied by this legislation I keep trying to understand how anyone can believe that? Nothing in the Mancin - Toomey amendment suggests that and in truth it STRENGTHENS your rights. The slippery slope argument is a ruse IMHO. Nothing that has happened recently in terms of legislation has anything to do with gun confiscation yet that's the argument people employ.

The liars here are the NRA and the outrageous propaganda they push - they're the liars and they're the ones that are a front for the gun lobby = gun money because at the end of the day they're true agenda is to help sell more guns and ammo...that's the real plot here....
Click to expand...
I have never met a gun control nut who did not wish ultimately that all private ownership of firearms be outlawed. The daily KOS article personifies the typical gun control freak. I will object to even the tiniest change because of incrementalization. It isn't paranoia when you are right about gun control nuts.

BTW, the anti-gun control lobby is us, we who join the NRA and other groups to stop the destruction of our constitutionally guaranteed inherent rights.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

haymarket said:
"... average gun nut control....."

you win the prize my friend for whatever the hell that means in your universe. :doh:roll:
Click to expand...
It means people who like you want to add just one more little barrier to firearm acquisition or the creation of a data base of gun owners.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

disneydude said:
You didn't read very carefully then. I could find many in which they referred to this legislation as "gun grabbing".....not what you claim.
Click to expand...
ANY new gun control is a step to confiscation.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

dnsmith said:
ANY new gun control is a step to confiscation.
Click to expand...

Thats the same argument that people used when they said "Smoking a joint leads to Heroin addiction". Reefer madness!
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

dnsmith said:
It means people who like you want to add just one more little barrier to firearm acquisition or the creation of a data base of gun owners.
Click to expand...

What barrier to firearms ownership do I want to add for people who can now obtain one legally?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

dnsmith said:
ANY new gun control is a step to confiscation.
Click to expand...

That is an absurd statement without any foundation in our history or in reality for that matter.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

haymarket said:
What barrier to firearms ownership do I want to add for people who can now obtain one legally?
Click to expand...


I'll give you an exact scenario.... Let's say a member of my family has had a bout with bi-polar in their past, but since has received treatment, and is stable with medication, and functions normally, and has for years since the initial diagnosis, should I be allowed to own a gun?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

haymarket said:
That is an absurd statement without any foundation in our history or in reality for that matter.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the question is or should be is how much trust do you place in our government as not to work on total gun confiscations in increments? If I could be guaranteed that the background checks would be the last gun control measure, then by all means pass it and let me alone. But no one can, it will be universal background checks this year, then lie low for a couple of years and move on to gun registration and lie low again for a few more years, then move to where you must obtain government permission to buy a gun followed by total confiscation.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

haymarket said:
Which has nothing to do with any bill on background checks taking away your rights.
Click to expand...

any bill that is not properly based on a delegation of power to the congress infringes on all of our rights


why should I have to pay for a background check or be inconvenienced by having to do one when I want to give my wife or brother a gun
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Perotista said:
Perhaps the question is or should be is how much trust do you place in our government as not to work on total gun confiscations in increments? If I could be guaranteed that the background checks would be the last gun control measure, then by all means pass it and let me alone. But no one can, it will be universal background checks this year, then lie low for a couple of years and move on to gun registration and lie low again for a few more years, then move to where you must obtain government permission to buy a gun followed by total confiscation.
Click to expand...

gun haters will always claim that their next law is the last and after it passes they will claim that NEW circumstances require a new law

25 or so years ago Sarah Brady came to cincinnati to help support a local waiting period (which had only the impact of putting the gun shops in the city proper out of business since all of us just went to Loveland, Norwood, Sharonville to buy our guns) she said to ME and others that a waiting period was all she wanted. Well later on she was back pushing for a national AWB. I ripped that retard up so bad she told former Mayor Dave Mann she'd never come back. That crazed bitch said the same thing nationally-all she wanted was the "Brady Bill" and before the ink was dry on that, she was pushing for semi auto bans.

just ask any of these gun haters where they will draw the line and they won't ever tell you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom